On Sat, 01 Oct 2005, Andreas Barth wrote:
> * Nathanael Nerode ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [051001 22:42]:
> > Thiemo Seufer wrote:
> > > Mailing {alpha,mips,[EMAIL PROTECTED] is my best guess. There
> > > is usually no reply, but from some cases I conclude the mailboxes are
> > > read. I don't know if those addresses are documented anywhere.
> > They're not. Perhaps they could be? :-) That would be a big help.
>
> http://www.debian.org/doc/developers-reference/ch-pkgs.en.html#s-porter-automation
Not good enough. Please add it to the central place we all go hunting for
buildd issues: buildd.debian.org.
<sarcasm>
Oh wait, I forgot that buildd.d.o is effectively read-only, as it has
already reached perfection. Never mind.
</sarcasm>
The most effective way to do it is IMHO a BTS entry for each ARCH port, to
track down all porting issues with a damn good memory. THAT's transparency,
and it is much more manageable than trying to contact a number of mailing
lists (which are often quite effective) and email addresses (which aren't
_apparently_). The PTS takes care of keeping whichever email addresses
informed.
And the history we get from the BTS can definately help track which arches
are boggling down the rest of Debian, and how often that happens.
--
"One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot
Henrique Holschuh
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
