Re: [Caml-list] Release 3.09.1
On Sat, Jan 07, 2006 at 10:39:16AM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 03:34:05PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> > What about binNMUing into one of the DELAYED queue, and in addition into an
> > unofficial archive, so they can be tested and fixed if needed and still be
> > rebuilt automatically ?
>
> Maybe, but in additiona bugs regarding the mishandled build-dependencies
> and dependencies should be filled as well. Packages without bumped
> dependencies are _wrong_ wrt to our policy and wrt to linking sanity of
> the shipped libraries.
Indeed. They should be RC even.
> > > If someone is willing to automate the process of building packages from
> > > our svn this is fine for me. But they should not be uploaded before the
> > > maintainer look at them (a staging period before the uploaded as
> > > proposed may be ok if someone else can look and test them).
> > DELAYED-7-days may be enough maybe ?
>
> IMO no, at least say, 10 days, but understand this is a matter of
> personal taste.
Not sure if there is such a thing as DELAYED-10-days queue.
> > Or maybe we do a single-arch full rebuilt externally (i am happy to try
> > providing the infrastructure for that, as i will be setting up my own powerpc
> > autobuilder in a month time or so), and once it is proven ok, we launch the
> > binNMU thingy ?
>
> If you already rebuilt everything externally why then ask for the NMU?
The importance here is not the NMU fact, it is the fact that you trigger a
auto-binNMU on the buildds. So you don't have to manually upload all of those
packages, just give the list of packages as hint to the buildd network. You
have then naturally to do sourcefull uploads all those packages which needs
bugfixes, but this is a different issue.
The idea is that this leaves the drudge work of rebuilding everything that is
fine to the buildds, and allow you to concentrate on what really needs done.
> It would be easy to plug in the mechanism a tool that bump the depencies
> as needed and, at that point, you can do a sourcefull NMU.
Ah, but you have to manually sign them then, which in the case of a buildd
binNMU, is done automatically in the normal buildd process.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
Reply to: