Bug#90511: proposal] addressing objections (re: disallow multi-distribution uploads)
>>"Marcus" == Marcus Brinkmann <Marcus.Brinkmann@ruhr-uni-bochum.de> writes:
Marcus> Are you sure you wanted to say "multiple versions of a
Marcus> package in the same distribution"? In my opinion, "one
Marcus> version of a package in multiple distributions" fits better
Marcus> in the context.
Marcus> If the latter is meant, I concur.
Hmm. I guess I did mean the latter. With age, the wiring in my
brain is certainly getting stranger.
>> There is not technical reason
>> for not building uploads to stable unstable twice in buildd either.
Marcus> I think this is not true. What is meant by this? It means
Marcus> building the same package twice, with the same version
Marcus> number, but the source (debian/changelog) modified to read
Marcus> "stable" and "unstable" each once.
Umm. No. If I have two buildd's, one for unstable, and one for
stable. When a package comes in for unstable, it goes to the unstable
buildd, and vice versa. When a package comes in for both, it is sent
to both buildd's, and the packlage built by the unstable buildd goes
into incoming normally, and the other one is hand installed by an
admin into proposed updates or something.
Marcus> Modifying the source is evil. Autobuilders should not do
Marcus> this.
I was not proposing modification of the source, no.
Marcus> Having two different packages with the same version number is
Marcus> evil, too. The package pool won't be able to cope for good
Marcus> reasons.
The stable package need not go into the package pool. Am I
mistaken in assuming that proposed updates packages are not in the
package pool? If I am mistaken, please scratch this part of my
message.
Marcus> I think one of the requirements for uploading to "stable
Marcus> unstable" should be that the package can be build on either
Marcus> and will run fine on both, so autobuilders are relieved from
Marcus> making a decision. I could agree with setting in stone a
Marcus> variation like: "the package must be build on stable and will
Marcus> run fine on both" (or build on unstable and run on both).
The latter is less likely than the former, since libraries are
rarely forward compatible across releases.
Marcus> But unless I am very mistaken, we must have one such rule for
Marcus> autobuilders and maintainers to follow.
I would not disagree.
manoj
--
Do you know Montana?
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
Reply to: