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

Re: tag2upload - request for DPL action



[adding -vote to the CC]

Hello,

On Mon 12 May 2025 at 03:43pm +02, Philipp Kern wrote:

> On 2025-05-12 15:33, Sean Whitton wrote:
>> On Mon 12 May 2025 at 03:16pm +02, Andreas Tille wrote:
>>
>>> Given this update, I have a few questions for the teams involved:
>>> 1. Is a new delegation still needed, or can tests begin without further
>>>    formal steps? If the keyring was installed by DSA as part of their
>>>    normal responsibilities, the originally proposed delegation might no
>>>    longer be necessary--can someone confirm this?
>> All that has happened is that a copy of the public key is now present on
>> fasolo.  dak still does not trust the key.
>> Therefore the delegation is still required, until and unless the FTP
>> team merge and deploy their branch.
>
> AIUI the deployment has happened on Saturday. The merge definitely
> happened[1].
>
> Kind regards
> Philipp Kern
>
> [1] https://salsa.debian.org/ftp-team/dak/-/commits/master?ref_type=HEADS

Thanks.

So: tag2upload's key became ostensibly trusted by dak on Saturday, and
no-one on the FTP Team informed the tag2upload Delegates of this fact.

We found out because the DPL wrote saying "everything is done, right?"
two days later, and I replied saying "huh, don't think so?", and Philipp
kindly let me know that in fact a deployment had occurred.

This is a highly unprofessional way for FTP Team members to be
interacting with (or, failing to interact with) another delegated team.

We should have been invited to perform testing by the FTP Team.  Indeed,
I just tried a test upload of dgit-test-dummy, and it was REJECT'd with
a strange error message.

Should we file a bug against ftp.debian.org?  Just write an e-mail?
We have no open channel of communication, despite our best efforts.

Let me note, nevertheless, my thanks to Ansgar for the technical work
he's done over the past two weeks.

-- 
Sean Whitton

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: