Re: Explications needed...
Le Fri, Dec 29, 2006 at 02:18:26PM +0100, Kurt Roeckx a écrit :
>
> I think you're confusing the buildd admin with the porters. I expect
> porters to read the debian-$arch@list.debian.org list, I don't expect
> the same from the buildd admin.
Dear all,
Maybe the "debian-someport@l.d.o" lists should be read by "those who
care" instead of just those who port ? When such a list does not react
anymore, does it really make sense to ask a DD to take the
responsability of a buildd and spend his time for an arch in which he
has no particular interest ?
I think that it would be a much better situation if a buildd admin would
be somebody who particularly cares for the corrseponding port. This
would warrant some reactivity, and if a core group of DDs interested in
a port can not provide a buildd admin, it may mean that the support for
the existence of the port is not sufficient.
(said after having wasted hours with the s390 port some weeks ago - I
did not guess that the buildd admin was not reading the list on which I
posted my mails).
Have a nice day, and happy new year to those who celebrate it this
evening.
--
Charles Plessy
http://charles.plessy.org
Wako, Saitama, Japan
Reply to: