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

Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting


Jeroen van Wolffelaar:

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.

Which is a good thing IMO, since said maintainers have less incentive to
incorporate patches for SCC architectures if it hinders rather than
furthers promotion into testing. Port patches are, at least to a
non-insignificant percentage, likely to break other architectures. Why
would I do that to my package, perhaps only five days after I uploaded
it (= five days before it would enter testing)?


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply to: