Re: Do not make gratuitous source uploads just to provoke the buildds!
Wouter Verhelst <email@example.com> writes:
> Op vr, 11-03-2005 te 19:14 -0800, schreef Steve Langasek:
>> The queue ordering is entirely automatic, and AIUI the queue(s) is (are)
>> sorted by:
>> - target suite
> - previous compilation state (already built packages are prioritized
> above packages never built for the target architecture)
>> - 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 agree with the w-b maintainers. The queue order is only interesting in
> the case where there is a backlog; in other cases, packages are usually
> built rather fast. In the case where there is a backlog, those trying to
> fix the architecture (usually those that are working on it) should be in
> charge of deciding what package gets built first, not the maintainer of
> a random package -- /all/ package builds are urgent if there's a
Since you think an empty queue is normal why then fight changes to the
queue order? If it is empty most of the time as you say the specific
order hardly matters. Packages will be build within 15 minutes of
their upload no matter what order as they will be the only packae in
As you say, the oder is only relevant when there is a backlog and that
is currently a badly starving algorithm.
The problem is that a backlog is more and more the normal day to day
business while an empty queue is rare. Obviously not for every arch
but always some archs.