Re: update on binary upload restrictions
El jue, 25-01-2007 a las 01:23 +0000, James Troup escribió:
[...]
>
> Why restrictions on binary uploads?
> ===================================
>
> So there are several reasons why these restrictions have been put in
> place:
>
> (o) reproducibility
>
[...]
>
> (o) logging
[...]
Shouldn't this also apply to i386 and/or amd64/ppc? (as those are the
main archtitectures being uploaded). I don't understand why I cannot
upload an alpha binary (apart of the obvious reason that I don't own an
alpha machine), but I can still make any kind of binary uploads.
I can agree with this goals, but this also mean that to achieve this,
source only uploads should be enabled.
[...]
> (Now if at this point, you're thinking about source only uploads,
> please see [*].)
[...]
> [*]
>
> Why not move to source only uploads?
> ====================================
>
> A question that often comes up when this subject is discussed is 'hey,
> I agree about the logging and reproducibility points above, so why not
> move to source only uploads so you get those for all binaries?'
>
> So, again, this is not something I personally think is a good idea but
> I won't stand in the way of consensus of the Release Managers and the
> developer community as a whole. I think it's a bad idea for two
> reasons:
Then why do you enable binary upload restrictions without asking
first? Of course I know that this question itself would imply a hughe
flamewar. It seems that it is the only way we have to communicate in
Debian right now, but acting without prior notice is worse than asking.
>
> (a) we don't currently have the buildd infrastructure for this - it
> would require a minimum of 2 (preferably 3) machines dedicated to
> being i386 buildds. It would also make i386 uploads much more
> sensitive to delays and really require better coverage than one
> human could provide.
I don't think that i386 hardware can be a problem in any way. We can
set up i386 buildds easily.
>
> (b) source only uploads are in my experience very often badly tested
> if they're even tested at all. For a long time after Ubuntu
> switched to source only uploads, it was really obvious that a
> large number of them hadn't even been test built, never mind
> installed or used.[3][4]
I also think so, but as we say in Spain, you cannot be at the same
time tolling bells and at procession.
--
Jose Carlos Garcia Sogo
jsogo@debian.org
Reply to: