Re: Secret changes for binNMUs
Michael Banck <mbanck@debian.org> writes:
> On Thu, Nov 24, 2005 at 06:51:24PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> Wouter Verhelst <wouter@debian.org> 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.
>
> 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.
<dt><a href="http://packages.debian.org/sbuild";>sbuild</a></dt>
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
http://buildd.debian.org/?
MfG
Goswin
Reply to: