Re: Bits from the FTPMaster meeting
On Tue, Nov 17 2009, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Le Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 08:27:22AM +0100, Yves-Alexis Perez a écrit :
>>
>> Unless your proposal is just for unstable but doesn't want to change the
>> policy for testing migration?
>
> Hi,
>
> Testing migration works the way it should: if a package is never built
> on an architecture, testing migration is not prevented. The problem is
> that for the sake of universality, some programs are built where
> nobody wants them. Then when there is a build failure, nobody wants
> the ‘hot potato’. Upstream does not support non-mainstream arches, the
> porters are busy porting more central packages, the package maintainer
> has user requests to answer and knows that nobody will send him kudos
> for building the package where it is not used.
I beg to differ. This sounds like a maintainer that is not
providing the support for their package, and needs to orphan that
package; not building on some architecture is often a symptom of
problems elsewhere as well. I am not sure we ought to support
maintainers that are neglectful of their packages.
manoj
--
There are some things worth dying for. Kirk, "Errand of Mercy", stardate
3201.7
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
Reply to: