Re: Secret changes for binNMUs
Wouter Verhelst <email@example.com> writes:
> They were, originally. Ryan's been very active on it since, and it's
> diverged a bit from the code you're maintaining.
Then he should send patches and bug reports to the debian
package. This split between the user/developer visible sbuild and the
secret actual buildd is just not in the spirit of Debian.
> I personally see the packages in unstable as something good for
> end-users who want to use it, or understand how the system works; but
> for Debian's purposes, it's not optimal.
So non "cabal" members should look at a different sbuild and then
magically figure out where and how the secret one differs? What is the
point in looking at sbuild if it isn't THE sbuild?
Last year the aim was to get the buildd sbuild and debian sbuild back
in sync and it pains me to see Ryan silently diferting it further and
further instead of aiding that goal.