[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: microwindows build status

On Fri, Jan 04, 2002 at 03:47:30PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> Michael Schmitz <schmitz@mail.biophys.uni-duesseldorf.de> writes:
> > (I rarely do these
> > days, rather rely on the maintainer to check build status and
> > logs). 
> This is not such a good idea.  Maintainers are generally not
> responsible for checking build status and logs; the port maintainer
> (whoever is responsible for making the binary NMU) should do that andn
> file an RC bug.
> Indeed, there are many packages that miss getting into testing because
> of some problem uploading or building one port or another, and
> maintainers in general seem to be totally unaware of these.  I think
> the people who take responsibility for uploading the binary NMUs for
> various ports need to also take the responsibility for filing bugs
> when things are failing.

I think that's a drastically unfair judgement.  I would rather ask
every maintainer to do a few extra steps for the quality of their
packages (or better yet, to improve automated systems to notify
(opt-in) maintainers about such problems).  The port maintainers
already have a significant amount of work to do on this front, and are
generally package maintainers themselves also.

Of course, I expect James to insert a comment here about how it isn't
really that much work... but we all accept that James is superhuman.

Daniel Jacobowitz                           Carnegie Mellon University
MontaVista Software                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer

Reply to: