[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: buildd administration

On Sat, Dec 10, 2005 at 03:51:36PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> writes:
> >   (a) seeing if the FTBFS can be fixed immediately, and finding it can't
> >   (b) documenting (this is the transparent bit, so pay attention) that
> >       fact by not having s390 incorrectly listed as a supported arch in
> >       the source and ensuring it does not incorrectly indicate a known
> >       broken build is successful as it did in the past
> >   (c) informing ftpmaster that the build currently in the archive is
> >       broken by filing a bug requesting the broken build be removed
> >       (you know, communicating with people)
> >   (d) downgrading the bug so that it is not incorrectly listed as
> >       a RC issue that the RM and QA teams have to attend to
> >   (e) as maintainer, work with upstream and porters to fix the
> >       downgraded but still open bug we were just talking about
> I disagree with this.  

Then you're not maintaining your packages properly, and you're making
life more difficult for the rest of the project out of spite.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: