On Mon, 31 Dec 2001, Jonathan Hseu wrote: > Last I asked on #debian-devel, source-only uploads aren't allowed (as in, you > can't just upload the orig.tar and the diff. With auto-builders in place, is > there any reason why?
They are allowed. See pine. > There are reasons why source-only uploads should be preferred, some being: I consisder these reasons they should not be allowed. > - The package can be compiled on boxes that are up-to-date with bugfixes in > gcc > and other Build-Depends. I personally don't upgrade my sid box that often > (I currently have to upgrade 843 new packages, install 33 new ones, remove 17 > for a dist-upgrade, understand why? :) So, the maintainer doesn't know if his package works with the current set of software in debian? This seems like a loss. > - Wouldn't the binaries be more trusted if they came from auto-builders > anyways? > So that way a maintainer can't just stick something in there that's not in the > source code. I would rather have the original upload be a binary one. I trust this more, as the maintainer has more likely installed what he has just built, and tested it out. No such assurance happens with a source only upload. > Binary uploads should be allowed for packages that don't have source code at > all or ones that depend on themselves for bootstrapping. For packages that don't have source this is the only way, so your argument means absolutely nothing.