Re: Do not make gratuitous source uploads just to provoke the buildds!
Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> writes:
> Re-uploading a package to provoke a buildd response is counterproductive,
> *particularly* when the package is already in Needs-Build on the missing
> architectures. Re-uploading doesn't change its position in the queue, but
> it *does* force buildds for all the other archs to needlessly rebuild the
> package. This is why the answer to your previous email was "please be
> patient".
Unfortunately, the queue ordering policy is unclear. I was guessing
that the priority of the upload would have something to do with
queueing policy.
Since the all but one of the other arch buildd's have empty
needs-build queues, it is harmless to force them to execute a
recompile and costs no scarce resources. I did check this before
uploading.
I made an upload because a related package (grisbi) just seemed to get
compiled by all the buildd's in a nifty two-day round trip time. It
was uploaded March 10, compiled by most buildds on the 10th, and by
arm and mipsel on the 11th. I concluded that the queue must take note
of priority or something like that.
Perhaps it got through the queue because the grisbi upload fixed an
serious RC bug. Well, the gnucash one fixes a critical RC bug, but
that isn't indicated in the changelog. Maybe I should add that?
If, perhaps, there was a clear indication of the buildd ordering
policy, then it could be properly used. Until then, I go on the basis
of guesswork.
Thomas
Reply to: