Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Sun, Dec 11, 2005 at 08:52:04AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: >> Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> > On Sat, Dec 10, 2005 at 06:53:47AM -0800, Blars Blarson wrote: > >> >> Again: what can I do with such a list? See the list below. > >> > Changes to the P-a-s list should be sent to the contacts listed at the top >> > of this file (http://buildd.debian.org/quinn-diff/Packages-arch-specific). > >> So I followed the instructions at the top of that file and requested a >> P-a-s entry, after asking people here what to do. No response. Hm. I >> wasn't sure what to make of that -- maybe this request is too trivial to >> bother with, it's fine for the builds to fail, and I should just ignore >> it? Or maybe my e-mail wasn't received? Or maybe I misunderstood >> something and this was the wrong channel or the wrong thing to do? > > Right, well, as noted, it's generally a fairly low priority to get packages > added to P-a-s -- even though it's an eventual goal, the waste just really > isn't so much (in the usual case) to warrant a rush job. So from that > standpoint, as long as there is quite such the backlog on P-a-s that there > is (from what I can see), it seems like something maintainers should also > give a pretty low priority to. > > Anyway, you could always try throwing this in Adam's direction as well now > that he's listed as a co-maintainer of the file.
Also any buildd admin can set the package to Not-For-Us status in wanna-build. That has the same effect as P-a-s except that it skews the stats. But it is a perfect temporary solution. MfG Goswin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]