Re: what about a unofficial public community repo? (was: Re: qmail and related packages in NEW)

To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: what about a unofficial public community repo? (was: Re: qmail and related packages in NEW)
From: Evgeni Golov <sargentd@die-welt.net>
Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2008 02:56:34 +0100
Message-id: <[🔎] ggq7gj$s17$1@ger.gmane.org>
References: <[🔎] 20081128181242.32463.qmail@6879aebe33b239.315fe32.mid.smarden.org> <[🔎] 20081128205101.14b7f4e9.codehelp@debian.org> <[🔎] 1227908554.30808.44.camel@petrie> <[🔎] e13a36b30811281728h1454ad3ej2e2e97ed69c6f9eb@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 10:28:58 +0900 Paul Wise wrote:

> Infrastructure should be similarly supported and hosted by mainly
> non-DDs; buildds, porting machines and so on.

Actually I was thinking about something similar yesterday.
Asa non-DD it is very hard to reproduce bugs from arches you don't own,
so why not build a network of buildds, accessible by non-DDs where they
can test their stuff?

Count on me on this, I offer my UltraSparc IIe as a playground :)

Reply to:

References:
- qmail and related packages in NEW
  - From: Gerrit Pape <pape@smarden.org>
- Re: qmail and related packages in NEW
  - From: Neil Williams <codehelp@debian.org>
- what about a unofficial public community repo? (was: Re: qmail and related packages in NEW)
  - From: William Pitcock <nenolod@sacredspiral.co.uk>
- Re: what about a unofficial public community repo? (was: Re: qmail and related packages in NEW)
  - From: "Paul Wise" <pabs@debian.org>

Prev by Date: Re: what about a unofficial public community repo? (was: Re: qmail and related packages in NEW)
Next by Date: Re: what about a unofficial public community repo? (was: Re: qmail and related packages in NEW)
Previous by thread: Re: what about a unofficial public community repo? (was: Re: qmail and related packages in NEW)
Next by thread: Re: what about a unofficial public community repo? (was: Re: qmail and related packages in NEW)
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread