Re: Do not make gratuitous source uploads just to provoke the buildds!
Op ma, 14-03-2005 te 00:10 -0800, schreef Steve Langasek:
> Well, my objection is basically the same as Thomas's here -- all package
> builds are *not* equally urgent,
Of course not, that is exactly my point.
But from the POV of a package's maintainer, all fixes are more or less
urgent. If some fixes weren't necessary, the upload wouldn't have been
there in the first place.
> and in fact, we have an "urgency" field
> in uploads that expresses this fact quite clearly. Certainly there's
> some danger of abuse by uploaders, but there are dozens of other things
> that maintainers *could* abuse right now and are only stopped from doing
> because they *shouldn't* do them.
> I wouldn't be bothered by porters choosing how to order builds, if the
> ordering they chose more closely corresponded to what the release team
> (and britney) want it to be. :)
I from my side wouldn't mind if someone from the release team would ask
me to prioritize a build if necessary; but I feel irky at the thought
of allowing other people to prioritize their packages' builds over
others, because that *will* make sure that eventually, those people that
do what is actually the right thing will have to wait for all eternity
for their packages to be built.
 this is technically possible, but only in a kindof hackish way, by
manually adding the package to a buildd's REDO file and (also manually)
setting it to 'building' by that host.
smog | bricks
AIR -- mud -- FIRE
soda water | tequila
-- with thanks to fortune