Re: status of buildds?
* Ingo Juergensmann
| On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 11:34:58PM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
| > On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 10:41:12AM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
| > > Thomas Bushnell BSG <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
| > > > If the s390 team is unhappy with w-b, they can simply set up their own
| > > > autobuilding and do it themselves; all the software is free software.
| > [..]
| > > We did that last year for m68k, mips, mipsel and alpha and it produced
| > > a great flame since some machines where hosted by non DDs and none of
| > > them were approved by the debian admin team. The opinions (including
| > > an RM too) expressed in that flame resulted in the effort to help
| > > archs with backlogs with extra buildds to shut down to comply with
| > > their wishes.
| > As you well know, the problem was that the buildds were run by
| > non-developers for whom we have no trust relationship, not that they
| > were being run by a developer unofficially.
| So, you call me not trustworthy, although it was *me* to first help out m68k
| when kullervo was unable to keep up with package building?
You are not a DD, so Debian does not have a trust relationship with
you. It has nothing to do whether you are trustworthy or not, it is
about whether you have the trust. Since you're not a DD, you don't
have that trust.
(And yes, I think it's bad that the m68k port seems to be so dependent
on somebody who isn't a DD.)
Tollef Fog Heen ,''`.
UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are : :' :