Steve Langasek <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> On Sun, Dec 11, 2005 at 08:52:04AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> Steve Langasek <email@example.com> writes:
>> > On Sat, Dec 10, 2005 at 06:53:47AM -0800, Blars Blarson wrote:
>> >> Again: what can I do with such a list? See the list below.
>> > Changes to the P-a-s list should be sent to the contacts listed at the top
>> > of this file (http://buildd.debian.org/quinn-diff/Packages-arch-specific).
>> So I followed the instructions at the top of that file and requested a
>> P-a-s entry, after asking people here what to do. No response. Hm. I
>> wasn't sure what to make of that -- maybe this request is too trivial to
>> bother with, it's fine for the builds to fail, and I should just ignore
>> it? Or maybe my e-mail wasn't received? Or maybe I misunderstood
>> something and this was the wrong channel or the wrong thing to do?
> Right, well, as noted, it's generally a fairly low priority to get packages
> added to P-a-s -- even though it's an eventual goal, the waste just really
> isn't so much (in the usual case) to warrant a rush job. So from that
> standpoint, as long as there is quite such the backlog on P-a-s that there
> is (from what I can see), it seems like something maintainers should also
> give a pretty low priority to.
> Anyway, you could always try throwing this in Adam's direction as well now
> that he's listed as a co-maintainer of the file.
Also any buildd admin can set the package to Not-For-Us status in
wanna-build. That has the same effect as P-a-s except that it skews
the stats. But it is a perfect temporary solution.