Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> No, buildd admins are responsible for fixing buildd problems. *Porters* are
>> responsible for *ensuring their port is a viable release candidate*. Given
>> that one of the release criteria is "keeping up with unstable", porters most
>> definitely *are* expected to help make sure packages are getting built.
>
> I think the problem is that if the buildds don't talk to the porters,
> and the porters aren't allowed to upload binNMUs themselves, then they
> are essentially barred from their assigned task.
>
> How about we make porters responsible for running their buildds
> instead of the current arrangement?
You mean allow porters to add buildds (or just buildd admins) to the
arch to increase redundancy? This can be a gradual process.
MfG
Goswin
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
