On Sat, Feb 24, 2001 at 07:59:17PM -1000, Brian Russo wrote:
> I can't speak first hand, but only from some of the bug reports I've
> received occasionally, and I think this makes the auto builder's job
> just at least a bit easier (having buil-depends)
Certainly.
> I think it should be MUST for sid (not woody).
This isn't a good way of looking at it at all, though. Aside from the
obvious error (sid stays as sid, it doesn't get released; the next
release will be sarge or some such), goals don't get reached by policy
people sitting in their little towers declaring that half the packages
in the distribution will not release unless they dance the appropriate
little jig.
If you want packages to support build-depends, start filing wishlist bugs
against packages that don't have build-depends. If you want to actually
do something particularly useful, work out what each package's build
dependencies are so the maintainer can just cut, paste and reupload.
Cheers,
aj, annoyed with the tendency to inflate bug severities to release-critical
--
Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.
``_Any_ increase in interface difficulty, in exchange for a benefit you
do not understand, cannot perceive, or don't care about, is too much.''
-- John S. Novak, III (The Humblest Man on the Net)
Attachment:
pgpjFjD5RDQXC.pgp
Description: PGP signature