Re: Do not make gratuitous source uploads just to provoke the buildds!
Andreas Barth wrote:
> * Mike Fedyk (firstname.lastname@example.org) [050316 20:55]:
> > Andreas Barth wrote:
> > >If that happens for a too long period, we might consider such an
> > >architecture to be too slow to keep up, and will eventually discuss
> > >about kicking it out of the architectures we wait for testing migration
> > >at all, or even kicking it out of testing at all. Not waiting for such
> > >an arch has happened and might happen again.
> > I think it makes sense to shorten the list of arches we wait upon for
> > testing migration, but I fail to see the usefulness of removing an arch
> > from testing.
> If we don't wait for an arch, it gets out-of-sync quite soon, and due to
> e.g. legal requirements, we can't release that arch. (In other words, if
> an arch is too long ignored for testing, we should remove it, as we
> can't release it in any case.)
Removing only the affected packages of that arch instead of the whole
thing looks more sensible. Of course this assumes the core packages
are kept in shape.