Re: Secret changes for binNMUs
Michael Banck <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> On Thu, Nov 24, 2005 at 06:51:24PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> 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
> When the sbuild package got orphaned two years ago or so, I asked Ryan
> whether he would like to maintain it, and he said he was not interested.
> Which is totally fine for me and about everybody else.
>> This split between the user/developer visible sbuild and the secret
>> actual buildd is just not in the spirit of Debian.
> 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.
The subject and initial mail is not about sbuild being secret but
about the overall change for Debian. I think that one is
justified. Nothing to do with this subthread.
As for http://www.debian.org/devel/buildd:
$ grep sbuild http://www.debian.org/devel/buildd
<em>wanna-build</em> and calls <em>sbuild</em> to build the packages.
This nice public page only points to the nice public sbuild debian
package. There is no link to the actual sbuild used on buildds.
Further the links for wanna-build and buildd (which probably
indirectly included sbuild) are broken:
http://m68k.debian.org/buildd/getting.html --> connection refused
Did you by chance mean the wanna-build svn link on