Bill Allombert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > The Debian project resolves that Debian developers allowed to perform > combined source and binary packages uploads should be allowed to perform > binary-only packages uploads for the same set of architectures.
The use case I imagine at this point is that a maintainer uploads a library package src+bin (e.g. src+amd64) for his private arch, and after weeks he notices, that it still has not been built on e.g. sparc yet. So he decides to start his spare Ultra 1 workstation, builds the package in his custom environment and uploads it. My question to this use case: What happens with the "lost" buildlogs? Is there any possibility for a maintainer who depends on this library to check the build logs for this package on this particular architecture? Is the maintainer somehow encouraged or force by policy to publish his buildlogs? What happens if a maintainer starts to maintain a rogue buildd which does not publish his buildlogs? What if this buildd is misconfigured and uploads hundreds of 'broken' packages? In short, how does this proposal address the issue James listed in http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2007/01/msg00760.html? I think this proposal needs further discussion. -- Gruesse/greetings, Reinhard Tartler, KeyID 945348A4
pgpu2CB03WSPe.pgp
Description: PGP signature
