On 29/08/11 at 09:47 +0200, Andreas Barth wrote: > * Lucas Nussbaum (lu...@lucas-nussbaum.net) [110829 08:59]: > > I'd like to reinforce the fact that it's the porters' responsibility > > to investigate porters issues, and propose the following > > responsibilities: > > (1) It is the responsibility of porters to: > > - track architecture-specific bugs (build failures, toolchain > > issues, etc) > > - investigate and solve such bugs > > Sorry, but I disagree here. I don't think it is reasonable to expect > porters to check for build failures in general, especially as many of > them just happen because of generic maintainer errors and > cross-architectures.
I'm not saying that porters should check for build failures in general. If you take a list of packages that failed on $PORTER_ARCH, but built fine on at least two or three other architectures, do you really expect to get many false positives (i.e, non-arch-specific problems)? - Lucas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110829110615.ga4...@xanadu.blop.info
