On Sat, Jan 12, 2008 at 11:51:14AM +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote: > ISTR it was intended to ensure the package at least builds fine in the > developer's environment, to reduce FTBFSes. I wasn't there at that time > though, but I've been told several times that I'll be an old DD before > it gets a chance to be changed. I guess you can call it historical.
The most precise reference to this issue it comes to my mind is: http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2007/01/msg00760.html In that mail it is well explained (or at least, it is explained in a way I agree with) why we should require *also* binary packages to be uploaded. However, it is not well motivated IMO why we shouldn't, for example, upload them and throw them away afterwards (see footnote [4], with which I personally disagree). The point of not having resources I'm quite sure can be mitigated. Feel free to revamp the discussion. Cheers. -- Stefano Zacchiroli -*- PhD in Computer Science ............... now what? [EMAIL PROTECTED],cs.unibo.it,debian.org} -<%>- http://upsilon.cc/zack/ (15:56:48) Zack: e la demo dema ? /\ All one has to do is hit the (15:57:15) Bac: no, la demo scema \/ right keys at the right time
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
