Problems in the buildd network (was: Re: s390 not currently projected releasable)
On Wednesday 16 March 2005 06:20, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> Blars Blarson <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> > Another architecure that isn't keeping up to the 98% mark has a buildd
> > mainainter who insists (to the point of threating) that I don't build
> > and upload packages to help the build with its backlog and lack of
> > requeueing.
> So? A buildd maintainer doesn't have a veto over other people
> uploading binary builds of packages. W-b and buildd's do not have a
> monopoly over binary NMUs; the procedures are well documented in the
> Developer's Reference. Seems to me that either the package maintainer
> or the porting team should be consulted, but given that, the buildd
> has no special status or authority. It's a nice thing, but it's not
> the only way to upload binary NMUs.
Additionally, this hints at hidden problems of this architecture which - in
the worst case - might lead to Debians sudden inability to support a
really-stable release on this architecture. Regardless of the outcome of the
post-Vancouver fallout, this is a problem that should be tackled before
blessing that arch as "stable".
- hallo... wie gehts heute?
- *hust* gut *rotz* *keuch*
- gott sei dank kommunizieren wir über ein septisches medium ;)
-- Matthias Leeb, Uni f. angewandte Kunst, 2005-02-15