On Thu, Jul 12, 2007 at 09:25:07AM -0400, Mike Furr wrote:
> How does it handle different architectures? E.g. does it show a package
> being built if it exists on at least 1 arch, or does it have to be built on
> all arches? For transitions, we clearly need the latter. Also, a nice
At the moment it only takes into account i386. I thought about that page
to spot which packages need to be transitioned at all (i.e. which
packages no one has yet taken care of). Questions like: why the package
is not in testing yet can be answered by other means.
Still:
1) the links about the relevant pages can and should be put, what do you
think of a link for each package to its "explained excuses" page?
Any other per-package link which can be useful?
2) considering other architectures is still useful, for example ATM if
someone uploads to powerpc and the rebuild breaks on i386 we will be
fooled to consider the package as needing work, while it's not the
case. I can implement a check which looks in all architectures and
only takes into the account the more up to date. Once I had to
implement it adding a warning like "hey, the package is not in sync
on ..." would be easy to add
> thing for the TODO list would be to list the packages that are not up to
> date, but have all of their dependencies satisfied on all arches.
Are you thinking about pinging buildd maintainers to reschedule builds
here? Isn't this information already available somewhere else, maybe for
all packages in the archive?
Cheers.
--
Stefano Zacchiroli -*- PhD in Computer Science ............... now what?
zack@{cs.unibo.it,debian.org,bononia.it} -%- http://www.bononia.it/zack/
(15:56:48) Zack: e la demo dema ? /\ All one has to do is hit the
(15:57:15) Bac: no, la demo scema \/ right keys at the right time
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature