Re: Debian needs more buildds. It has offers. They aren't beingaccepted.
Wouter Verhelst <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> On Thu, Feb 19, 2004 at 11:56:13PM +0800, Cameron Patrick wrote:
> > Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > | > If this is the case, it should be IMHO be considered to change the
> > | > interface to w-b from now via command line (means: access via ssh is
> > | > necessary) to something via a SMTP-like protocol.
> > |
> > | Uh, thanks, but no thanks. I, personally, wouldn't want random people,
> > | or even random developers, to start messing with the wanna-build
> > | database. It's *good* that there are access controls. Yeah, they have
> > | their drawbacks, but that doesn't make them bad.
> > I don't think that Andreas was arguing that there should be no
> > wanna-build access controls, but that you shouldn't need ssh access to
> > have w-b access.
> Well, then, that wouldn't "solve" anything. If there are still access
> controls in place, then there's still someone who'll have to manage
> The only alternative would be to remove the access controls, but I'd
> highly oppose to that.
The middle ground is to have access control but have more people able
to change it, like any buildd admin like it was before (or so someone
said). I think there should be at least one person from each archs
autobuilder admins with access. That way there is a group (no single
point of failure) and knowledge from every arch is present.