Bug#744246: Processed: build profiles not yet supported by debian infrastructure
Helmut Grohne <email@example.com>:
> I ask you to find a way that enables uploading packages that make use of
> build profiles to the experimental archive as soon as possible. The
> need for build profiles is already known for years (#661538), but it was
> hard to agree on a syntax which finally happened when dpkg 1.17.2 was
> uploaded to sid in December 2013.
> Currently uploading Build-Profile enabled packages fails, because such
> packages are rejected by dak. The immediate problem was summarized in
> this bug report:
> Since filing that bug Johannes Schauer and myself talked to various
> teams to address this issue ultimately leading to no progress.
> * FTP indicated that they can work with whatever DSA installs. Using a
> non-packaged copy of python-apt from jessie was considered too much
> maintenance burden.
> * DSA indicated that they only want to install software from stable or
> * SRM deemed our patches too invasive. Thread starts at:
> * backports indicated that the patches are against the backports
Helmut, can you provide references to or copies of the communications
with ftpmaster, DSA and backports ?
> While each team's members were constructive at all times and their
> reasons are reasonable, the result is that build profiles do not work
> Given the above, I ask CTTE to find a constructive way allows uploading
> Build-Profile enabled packages to experimental (or even sid).
Concretely, I think you are asking the committee to overrule one of
the following decisions:
- ftpmaster's decision against using a non-packaged python-apt
- DSA's decision only to use stable or stable-backports
- SRM's decision not to accept your patches
- backports's decision not to accept your patches
Is that right ?