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

Re: Source only uploads?

Andrew Suffield dijo [Tue, Oct 21, 2003 at 07:12:22PM +0100]:
> Strictly as stated, your goal is accurate, but as implied, it is
> not. You are implying that this applies only to binary packages.
> I say that failing to function when built in anything but a particular
> artificial environment is a serious bug in a source package.
> Any action whose effect is to avoid noticing these bugs cannot be a
> good idea.

I completely agree with you. A natural environment has a much
larger probability to introduce mistakes than an artificial one - if a
mistake appears when building in a overly limited artificial
environment, we can quite confidently conclude that the packager
omitted something. Most (trivial) FTBFS bugs I have inspected arise
from an omitted build-dependency. Many, as Sven Luther points out, are
introduced because the natural environment (the maintainer's machine)
has some packages that do not belong to our unstable branch and thus
generate problematic (sometimes with problems too subtle to be easily
found, that often arise after the package has descended into

I sent this idea because many people were debating if it would be a
waste of autobuilder resources to restrict to source-only uploads or
binary uploads with a discarded binary (which I think would be
best). While writting down my idea, some extra thoughts twisted it
beyond any recognition - but the basic idea stands. I would prefer not
letting packages into testing which were not autobuilt.

As a sidenote, I remember some months ago there was a thread about
information regarding a particular developer's working environment
being distributed with the packages they built - If everything were to
be autobuilt, we would also get rid of this (minor, IMHO) problem.


Gunnar Wolf - gwolf@gwolf.cx - (+52-55)5630-9700 ext. 1366
PGP key 1024D/8BB527AF 2001-10-23
Fingerprint: 0C79 D2D1 2C4E 9CE4 5973  F800 D80E F35A 8BB5 27AF

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: