Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting
On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 12:32:05PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> Note that I *have* offered to help out maintaining buildd hosts for
> architectures currently maintained by other people who are also in other
> roles in the project, and that this help was turned down; and given the
> fact that I've maintained a varying number of buildd hosts (but at least
> one) ever since july 2001, I would say that I'm more than qualified to
> do this.
> While I did (and still do) understand the reasons for not accepting that
> help, it's not really fair now to suddenly say that the burden "isn't on
> the porters today".
Steve was probably referring to the burden of fixing and debugging
packages that fail to work/build on a specific architecture, and not to
the buildd stuff. It is currently the package maintainer of a package
that doesn't work on a specific architecture that's faced with his
package not being allowed in testing, and s/he will is in practice the
primary responsible for debugging, asking help, and fixing the issue.
Porters can suffice at the moment with filing FTBFS bugs and providing
help when requested, but there is no incentive to fix the issues
This is what causes the major burden of making sure all of the archive
works for $arch is on the set of package maintainers, and not primarily
on the porters for that $arch.
Jeroen van Wolffelaar
Jeroen@wolffelaar.nl (also for Jabber & MSN; ICQ: 33944357)