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

Re: Source-only uploads

On Mon, 31 Dec 2001, Jonathan Hseu wrote:

> Last I asked on #debian-devel, source-only uploads aren't allowed (as in, you
> can't just upload the orig.tar and the diff.  With auto-builders in place, is
> there any reason why?

They are allowed.  See pine.

> There are reasons why source-only uploads should be preferred, some being:

I consisder these reasons they should not be allowed.

> - The package can be compiled on boxes that are up-to-date with bugfixes in gcc
> and other Build-Depends.  I personally don't upgrade my sid box that often
> (I currently have to upgrade 843 new packages, install 33 new ones, remove 17
> for a dist-upgrade, understand why? :)

So, the maintainer doesn't know if his package works with the current set of
software in debian?  This seems like a loss.

> - Wouldn't the binaries be more trusted if they came from auto-builders anyways?
> So that way a maintainer can't just stick something in there that's not in the
> source code.

I would rather have the original upload be a binary one.  I trust this more,
as the maintainer has more likely installed what he has just built, and tested
it out.  No such assurance happens with a source only upload.

> Binary uploads should be allowed for packages that don't have source code at
> all or ones that depend on themselves for bootstrapping.

For packages that don't have source this is the only way, so your argument
means absolutely nothing.

Reply to: