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

Re: Do not make gratuitous source uploads just to provoke the buildds!

On Fri, Mar 11, 2005 at 05:03:55PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> 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.

Yes, it is unclear.  The reality is that upload priority does not contribute
to queue ordering.  There's been sufficient confusion on this point that I
had to check the wanna-build code for myself to be sure of it, and I'm aware
that confusion persists for many.

> 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. 

It is not harmless; it costs buildd admin time to review/process the build
logs, and if the libraries available in unstable change on one or more
architectures between the time the package was previously built and the next
time it's built, there can be additional delay resulting from waiting on
those other libraries to transition to testing.

> 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?

The queue ordering is entirely automatic, and AIUI the queue(s) is (are)
sorted by:

- target suite
  - package priority
    - package section
      - package name

I personally believe it would be beneficial to prioritize by upload urgency
as well (probably as a sort criterion between package priority and package
section), but the w-b maintainers disagree.

Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: