Re: Debian needs more buildds. It has offers. They aren't beingaccepted.
Nathanael Nerode <neroden@twcny.rr.com> writes:
> Mathieu Roy wrote:
> >Now, I think the way out of the conflict is from Nathaniel and friends
> >to list what they would like to do precisely (the future), by avoiding
> >any references to what was not possible because of bla bla (the past).
> <snip>
> >For instance, the title of the thread is: Debian needs more
> >buildds. It has offers. They aren't being accepted. There are 3
> >questions here, with apparently no clear answer.
>
> Point. Thank you. :-)
>
> In re buildds, and in declining order of importance:
> * I'd like a quick, public reply to questions sent to the port mailing lists
> like "Why hasn't qt-x11-free built on mipsel despite being first in the queue
> for weeks?"
> * I'd like there to be a second buildd for mipsel. I'd like a public
> explanation as to why the offered one isn't being used -- or for it to be
> accepted.
> * I'd like public statement(s) as to why akire, mrvn, and tanda aren't
> acceptable buildds and/or why their administrators are untrustworthy -- or
> for them to be accepted.
My two buildds are currently stoped. It was hinted, second hand
rumors, that their acceptance was coupled with me becoming a DD (even
though a experienced buildd admin and full DD is already
administrating them). With my rejection I stoped investing the extra
time required to keep them running manually. Wouter is currently too
busy and will decide after FOSDEM if he wants to continue running them
in the hostile environment.
Given my rejection I'm also not inclined to buy the ram upgrade for
both, a better network card or buy bigger harddisks for them. I thinks
thats understandably. They are upper and middle range sized already so
they would still be usefull.
> * I would like each buildd to be properly reported on the pages at
> www.buildd.net, with no "not participating" entries -- or the equivalent
> information provided in some other way.
Ingo and I were thinking about coupling the heartbeat more closely
with buildd and its watcher. Currently it only says that cron is still
running. We wanted to add the state of the buildd (started,
NO-DAEMON-PLEASE, building XYZ, NO-DAEMON-PLEASE after XYZ). Maybe the
number of "maybe successfull" and "uploading" packags too, since thats
easy to include.
> * I'd like to see built packages uploaded weekly (or more often, of course)
> * I'd like to see 'building' packages which failed to build
> requeued/dep-waited/failed every two weeks (or more often, of course)
> * When the above schedules can't be met, I'd like to see an appropriate
> mention on the www.buildd.net webpage -- or other appropriate location.
>
> Now to forestall the expected complaints.
>
> *If* the reason certain things can't be done is that certain people are "too
> busy", *then*:
> * I'd like there to be more people given the authority/ability to do those
> things
>
> If the complaint is that nobody else can do these things, then:
> * I'd like a request to be issued asking for volunteers to help do these
> things, with required skills listed
> * or, I'd like the "busy" people to drop or share one or more of their other
> jobs so as to have more time for this one!
I can only second those suggestions if my word as rejecee has any
weight.
MfG
Goswin
Reply to: