confusion about autobuilders/whom to thank

[Jay Berkenbilt <ejb@ql.org>]

Something positive happened that I don't understand, and I'm trying to
find out whom to thank. :-) I also am trying to figure out what
exactly did happen so that I understand it better.  I might be trying
to solve the wrong problem.

The xerces23 and xerces24 packages are mysteriously on not-for-us
lists for some platforms.  Specifically, xerces23 and xerces24 are
both on mips's not-for-us, and xerces24 is also on those of mipsel and
powerpc.

http://www.buildd.net/buildd/mips_Not-For-Us.html
http://www.buildd.net/buildd/mipsel_Not-For-Us.html
http://www.buildd.net/buildd/powerpc_Not-For-Us.html

However, the latest versions of xerces23 and xerces24 have both been
built for mips and even have buildd logs showing the mips build.  How
is it that they got autobuilt even though they are on the Not-For-Us
list for those platforms?  Are the not-for-us lists I cited above
actually used?

Interestingly, there are no buildd logs for the latest versions of
xerces23 or xerces25 for mipsel or powerpc though the packages have
been built.  xerces24 is still out of date on mipsel and powerpc.

http://buildd.debian.org/build.php?pkg=xerces23
http://buildd.debian.org/build.php?pkg=xerces24
http://buildd.debian.org/build.php?pkg=xerces25

Are buildd logs not getting updated?  Did someone build the packages
manually?  If the packages were built manually (or otherwise), how can
I find out who built and uploaded them?  (I am not yet a DD, but in
this case, I don't know how a DD would find this out either.  The
binary .debs are not signed.)

Basically, the current situation, though an improvement over before,
doesn't fit with my understanding of how things are.  Any
clarification or pointers would be useful.

-- 
Jay Berkenbilt <ejb@ql.org>
http://www.ql.org/q/