Re: BREAKING NEWS: Debian developers aren't trusted
Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 15, 2007 at 08:37:27AM +0100, Martin Zobel-Helas wrote:
>> On Thu Feb 15, 2007 at 13:13:36 +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
>> > -vote dropped
>
> And readded apparently. Do we really have to have these conversations
> across multiple lists?
>
>> > > i think someone running more than one autobuilder for more than _two_
>> > > years now (okay, not for the officical archive, but i see that as
>> > > nonrelevant here) demonstrats very good that he mets your mentioned
>> > > technical constraints.
>> I didn't thought of Aurelien, but of a few other persons, who are acting
>> as buildd maintainers for experimental and non-free packages.
>
> Experimental and non-free packages go to the official archive... I'm
> not seeing what you're asking for here.
Are you so overworked, or are you deliberately "forgetting"? It has
been suggested multiple times in the past to use existing or new
hardware and add it to the set of standard autobuilders. Many arches do
not meet the redundancy requirement, and we don't have autobuilders for
i386 at all AFAIK. Moreover, the current buildd admin's apparently
don't have adequate time to communicate, which could be ameliorated by
adding people. Even if nobody had asked so far, we should ask people
who seem capable of doing it.
Regards, Frank
--
Dr. Frank Küster
Single Molecule Spectroscopy, Protein Folding @ Inst. f. Biochemie, Univ. Zürich
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
Reply to: