On Sat, Mar 12, 2005 at 03:19:23PM +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote: > [Probably going a bit off track for -release; MFT to -devel] > On Fri, Mar 11, 2005 at 07:14:35PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > > 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. > I'm trying to work out why package *section* matters at all. Package name > is a bit odd, too, but including the section in there is just totally whack. Consider that libraries have their own section. Certain package sections are (on the whole) more central to the dependency graph than others, so it's to our advantage to order those first to reduce the need for give-backs or dep-waits. > Upload priority would be nice to sort by, but I think the queue needs to be > as FIFO as possible for fairness and "principle of least surprise" sake. > Now I have this urge to go and make surgery on w-b. Given that the w-b maintainers disagree, changing the code is not the hard part. The system is designed such that it only really works properly if the buildds drain the Needs-Build queue on a regular basis. This doesn't seem terribly robust to me, but it's not my call. -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature