Philipp Kern <pk...@debian.org> writes:
> On 04.04.24 20:51, Bill Allombert wrote:

>> I still think we should allow Autobuild: no as an escape hatch.  If we
>> want to require non-free package to be autobuildable, we should be more
>> explicit about it (and probably require more feedback from
>> debian-devel).

> There is no requirement for non-free to be autobuildable today. This
> change also does not introduce this, except for everything that is to be
> built on official builders to not require network access.

I think Bill's point is that the section of Policy being changed here
isn't only for autobuilt packages.  It sets general requirements for all
Debian packages, including non-free packages that are never autobuilt, and
therefore arguably prohibits network use during the build of a non-free
package that was never intended to build on the autobuilders, which is a
bit outside the scope of the original motivation for this change.

(I didn't understand that point at first.)

I'm not sure what I think about that.  We have a general escape hatch
already for non-free packages in Policy 2.2.3 that says they may not fully
comply with Policy, which may be sufficient.  Builds that use the network
seem like a bad idea even in non-free packages because it means we may not
be able to rebuild them since all of the relevant data is not in the
Debian source package.

-- 
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org)              <https://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>

Reply via email to