Re: [GR] DD should be allowed to perform binary-only uploads
On Sat, Feb 10, 2007 at 03:27:25PM +0100, Frank Küster wrote:
> Steve Langasek <email@example.com> wrote:
> > The error rate on requeue requests that reach me is significant, even from
> > people who are well-informed and involved in the process (e.g., fellow
> > release-team members). Maybe they're less cautious because they know I vet
> > all requests, but I would expect that opening dep-waits/requeues up to the
> > general dev population would result in a *lot* of unnecessary rebuild tries,
> > stuck packages holding up transitions, etc., because the average developer
> > simply isn't clued in on this stuff.
> > Heck, before m68k was dropped as a factor in package propagation into
> > testing, I was routinely finding bogus dep-waits set by the m68k buildd
> > maintainers themselves, and that's only about a half-dozen people.
> I can name you the reasons why I don't have much of a clue about this (I
> - it wasn't part of the NM T&S process, IIRC; all the technical details
> of testing propagation, freeze/unblock/, and general release team work
> were a bit meager maybe.
In the NM process, you're not expected to learn about everything in
Debian. It's about what you as a normal DD need to know.
If you want to do release team work, that's something you'll have to
learn, and it's actually not that hard to learn.
> - it's not easy to see what's going on there, and why. For example, I
> don't know where I can read what dep-wait means and why and how a
> package is put in this state. I think I know what it means and why it
> needs to be put there (manually), but that's just because it seems
> logical. And although I'm not the most involved developer, at least I
> once setup a buildd and read about wanna-build (about two years ago,
> forgot all...).
So you do know that there exist documentation about wanna-build. It
Anyway, it's all at:
And the states itself:
> - What's the contact point for asking for dep-wait or requeue? I guess
> it's that famous bunch of addresses that's also known for getting no
> response, and when you want to learn something, an occasional "thanks,
> it seems you've grasped the principle" or "Thanks, but you missed the
> following" is very helpful.
I think in most cases you don't request dep-waits and let the buildd admin
deal with that itself. It's probably easier to just wait until the
dependencies are available and then request it to be requeued. But
$firstname.lastname@example.org is the right place for any such requests.
> Of course it's difficult to change that. Someone should write a nice
> page about it, and "someone" is, as usual, a synonym for "not me".
So, which parts do you think aren't documented properly?