[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: packages for unreleased (was Re: [buildd] Vivaldi & Elgar sbuild ready, Arrakis next)

On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 07:30:03PM +0000, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> Wouter Verhelst dixit:
> >> >It's probably better to add them to no-auto-build on all our buildd
> >> >hosts -- or, better yet, to use packages-arch-specific for that. Not
> >>
> >> I think adding one entry into one centralised database is better
> >> than distributing a file across all hosts or…
> >>
> >> >sure if we have that, though -- will check with aurelien. Meanwhile,
> >>
> >> … committing to P-A-S into git (I think I’ve seen it there).
> >
> >Ah, good.
> […]
> >If you know about p-a-s, and we have access to it, it might make more
> >sense to have you put it there immediately, rather than have me put all
> Well, P-A-S lives at “the wanna-build admins” page:
> git+ssh://buildd.debian.org/srv/buildd.debian.org/git/packages-arch-specific.git
> works, I can clone it, but it's owned by wbadm:wbadm which I’m not in.

Ah, it's the same one for all architectures? That makes sense, I suppoe

> Also, the file is shared for all of Debian, so I don’t know whether
> they’d let me in

They should -- Adam Conrad got in back when he was an m68k buildd admin.
Also, even though it's the same file for everyone, that doesn't mean all
the entries in that file apply to all architectures (it wouldn't make
sense if it did).

At any rate, can't hurt to ask, right? FWIW, the wbadm people live on
debian-wbadm@lists.debian.org. They're also pretty fast in responding to
replies, in my experience.

> I’d suggest to try the --no-build with a subsequential upload to
> check if it’s reset automatically once. From what I’ve read about
> build states, not-for-us is also for “packages that need porting”
> so it might stick. If not, we could always look for a better
> solution. (w-b --list=not-for-us seems to show the list, so we’d
> also not “lose/forget” packages there.)

We can do that, I suppose, but we'll need p-a-s access anyway, so...

Copyshops should do vouchers. So that next time some bureaucracy requires you
to mail a form in triplicate, you can mail it just once, add a voucher, and
save on postage.

Reply to: