also sprach Florian Weimer <email@example.com> [2005.02.12.1908 +0100]: > Interesting, thanks. I believe the --->O arrays are confusingly > labled. "package installation" is probably a better choice. The > difference between "package propagation" and "package upload" is > not clear, at least to me. okay for the first. the difference between propagation and upload is whether it happens automatically by the archive scripts, or has to be manually instigated by the developer (uploaded). do you have a suggestion how to improve this? > I suppose you should split the diagram in two because the > before-incoming part and the after-incoming part are not too > strongly connected, and the result would be more readable. well, i guess you are somewhat right, although the split will be difficult. i guess just leaving out the incoming part altogether at the risk of not being absolutely correct may be an option. anyway, i am tempted to leave it as complex as it is and to add a note that it's not supposed to be any more overwhelming than reality is. :) upon careful study, the graph *can* be used to extract information, no? also sprach Kevin Mark <firstname.lastname@example.org> [2005.02.13.1031 +0100]: > > I suppose you should split the diagram in two because the > > before-incoming part and the after-incoming part are not too > > strongly connected, and the result would be more readable. > > This is something about which I will think. Yes, me too. If you have any suggestions on how to split, I would love to hear them. Kevin: I hope I did not step on your feet, but I was in a rush to get some version done, so I did not contact you. You are cordially invited to work from my sources, or we can maintain in parallel. In any case, I hope you are okay with the attribution I gave. Otherwise, please let me know. also sprach Otavio Salvador <email@example.com> [2005.02.12.1947 +0100]: > mfk> Given that incoming contains the source package (unless orig.tar.gz > mfk> is pulled from unstable, should add that), the buildds really don't > mfk> deal with the upstream sources or the unpacked source tree > mfk> maintained by the developer. > > Buildds deal with source package and not binary package. I thought > you mean with package source the .dsc, .diff.gz and .orig.tar.gz > files. Right, and incoming also contains them. The "sources" item is really supposed to be the upstream sources or the directory on the developer's machine holding the stuff, but inaccessible as such to the buildds. -- Please do not send copies of list mail to me; I read the list! .''`. martin f. krafft <firstname.lastname@example.org> : :' : proud Debian developer, admin, user, and author `. `'` `- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing a system Invalid/expired PGP subkeys? Use subkeys.pgp.net as keyserver!
Description: Digital signature