Re: Secret changes for binNMUs
On Fri, 25 Nov 2005, Michael Banck wrote:
> 1. Please drop the `secret' immediately. Unless you really want to call
> http://www.debian.org/devel/buildd `secret'. That your mail got resent
> with the this subject to debian-devel-announce is already stressing it
> *a lot*, IMHO.
I did the forwarding. As far as I am concerned:
1. sbuild has nothing to do with the email sent to d-d-a, and this whole
subthread about sbuild upstream and secrets is insane.
A Debian maintainer must keep close track of upstream, and build a
good enough work relationship with upstream authors to at the very
least get informed when repositories move. sbuild is NO exception
2. Any changes to something as basic as the package numbering scheme
must be widely announced to all developers, and properly documented.
The fact that such changes are now in effect, and no announcement was
posted to d-d-a within 48h of they being deployed *IS* enough to
*sarcastically* call it a "secret" change alright, unless DAK is still
accepting old-style binary NMUs along with new-style ones (and maybe
even then). Calling it "secret" and actually meaning it is childish, of
I am pretty sure eventually we would get some proper announcement,
but "eventually" ain't good enough IMHO, thus the forwarding.
"One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot