Re: throw away debs and source only uploads
On Tue, 07 Jun 2011, Andreas Barth wrote:
> * Don Armstrong (email@example.com) [110607 04:25]:
> > On Mon, 06 Jun 2011, Philipp Kern wrote:
> > > I.e. I think we should still allow non-buildd binaries, e.g. for
> > > those cases you mentioned.
> > Non-buildd binaries should still be allowed, but they should be
> > followed immediately by a binNMU. [Are there any cases where we
> > wouldn't want to rebuild the package after it was bootstrapped?]
> There are cases where porters need to upload, because of "funny"
> issues. Or hand-builds within sane buildd chroots where the buildd
> software refuses. Or similar. (I think I did less than 10 such
> uploads recently.)
Ok. Am I correct that these odd cases are bugs which should be fixed?
If so, it seems reasonable to queue a binNMU, and then file bugs
appropriately if it failed.
[T]he question of whether Machines Can Think, [...] is about as
relevant as the question of whether Submarines Can Swim.
-- Edsger W. Dijkstra "The threats to computing science"