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

Bug#744246: Processed: build profiles not yet supported by debian infrastructure

Helmut Grohne <helmut@subdivi.de>:
> I ask you to find a way that enables uploading packages that make use of
> build profiles[1] 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
>    stable-backports.
>  * SRM deemed our patches too invasive. Thread starts at:
>    https://lists.debian.org/debian-dpkg/2014/04/msg00034.html
>  * backports indicated that the patches are against the backports
>    policy.

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
> now.
> 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 ?


Reply to: