On 12/01/2008, Asheesh Laroia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Thanks - I have read the whole > http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2007/01/msg00760.html thread now, as > well as have skimmed the debian-mentors thread another posted here. > > I agree whole-heartedly with your position, which has been described by > others here on debian-mentors and on debian-devel. I think "Require > binaries and throw them away" is a very good strategy. It seems there is > fairly wide consensus that having the buildds build every package is a > good thing.
IMHO it would be better to let the buildds rebuild the package against the testing suite (as opposed to unstable) as a last requirement for the package to enter testing. But this of course means even more complex buildd setup and probably more need for hinting. -- Jens Peter Secher. _DD6A 05B0 174E BFB2 D4D9 B52E 0EE5 978A FE63 E8A1 jpsecher gmail com_. A. Because it breaks the logical sequence of discussion. Q. Why is top posting bad? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]