On Thu, Mar 22, 2001 at 08:23:20AM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > No, you have outlined problems in dinstall and the buildd > process. There is inherently no reason not to have multiple versions > of a package in the same distribution using package pools, apart from > the current implementation of dinstall.
Are you sure you wanted to say "multiple versions of a package in the same distribution"? In my opinion, "one version of a package in multiple distributions" fits better in the context. If the latter is meant, I concur. > There is not technical reason > for not building uploads to stable unstable twice in buildd either. I think this is not true. What is meant by this? It means building the same package twice, with the same version number, but the source (debian/changelog) modified to read "stable" and "unstable" each once. Modifying the source is evil. Autobuilders should not do this. Having two different packages with the same version number is evil, too. The package pool won't be able to cope for good reasons. I think one of the requirements for uploading to "stable unstable" should be that the package can be build on either and will run fine on both, so autobuilders are relieved from making a decision. I could agree with setting in stone a variation like: "the package must be build on stable and will run fine on both" (or build on unstable and run on both). But unless I am very mistaken, we must have one such rule for autobuilders and maintainers to follow. Thanks, Marcus -- `Rhubarb is no Egyptian god.' Debian http://www.debian.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] Marcus Brinkmann GNU http://www.gnu.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.marcus-brinkmann.de
