Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > It means that when one is told "just wait, your package will get > > rebuilt"; it is not necessarily true at all. There is no upper bound > > at all on time to wait for building, and that's a disaster. > > This paragraph assumes nobody ever looks the length of the needs-build > queue of his architecture, and nobody feels bad when the queue is longer > than normal. That idea would be hilarious if it wasn't sad.
There is no need-build queue; please don't call it that because it causes people to misunderstand it. "Queue" means "FIFO", at least to some degree, where needs-build isn't FIFO in any degree. I have plenty of evidence that the buildd maintainers look at the length and feel bad when it's long. But looking at it and feeling bad aren't sufficient to get a package built. > In reality, the upper bound is determined by motivated porters who try > hard to avoid the queue ever to grow too long, day after day. I have no doubt about their good intentions and trying hard. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
