Re: mozilla.d.n (was: Bits from the Release Team - Kicking off Wheezy)
On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 02:18:06PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> * Mike Hommey (mh@glandium.org) [110430 13:28]:
> > On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 01:06:57PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > > * Mike Hommey (mh@glandium.org) [110430 12:16]:
> > > > That being said, it would be really helpful to be able to get buildds
> > > > to build the mozilla.d.n packages...
> > >
> > > Would it work to build the packages in unstable? If so, why not
> > > uploading them to experimental and re-branding them in mozilla.d.n?
> >
> > I'm not sure to understand what you are suggesting.
>
>
> The question is how could we get the packages built so that we don't
> need to setup yet another buildd suite (or more general, I want to
> avoid setting one suite per package). Of course, ppa would come to
> rescue here, and it's really only a question of "someone would need to
> write the code".
>
> I would propose the following for now:
>
> 1. For unstable users, upload the packages to experimental, and
> extract them from there once they are built.
> 2. For testing users, do the same (but only take the packages if they
> have dependencies fullfilable in testing)
> 3. For stable and oldstalbe users, upload the packages to bpo, and
> extract them from there.
>
> All that can (and should) be scripted of course.
Ah, so that's an hypothetical case, involving minimal changes to the
current buildd system. But it currently isn't possible.
Mike
Reply to: