On Thu, 14 Jul 2016 15:56:57 +0200, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: > > If you were able to provide all the "Arch: any" binary packages, failure > > to build in the official autobuilders would not be serious, then? > At this point this becomes too theoretical, what you describe here is > not what a DD usually do. I prefer to remain on the practical side and > observe than uploading arch indep packages is common, while uploading > all arch any packages is not. > -A failures have no impact because the arch all packages are already > built by the DD.
I slightly disagree. Since source-only uploads are available (August 2015 also for arch:all package), I and many other pkg-perl members only do source-only uploads to finally (!) get the advantage of a rebuild by a build daemon. > -B failures have a real impact because it renders the > package unavailable on the architectures other than the one used by the > DD. Hence the different severity between -A and -B failures. > So let's remain pragmatic and call "serious" something that is really > serious for our users. True, but this also means that users might get packages which are built in a potentially unclean environment, which is something we should try to get rid of. (I have no strong optionion about this specific package or its bug severity but in general I think we should move to source-only uploads rather sooner than later.) Cheers, gregor -- .''`. Homepage https://info.comodo.priv.at/ - OpenPGP key 0xBB3A68018649AA06 : :' : Debian GNU/Linux user, admin, and developer - https://www.debian.org/ `. `' Member of VIBE!AT & SPI, fellow of the Free Software Foundation Europe `- NP: Steppenwolf: Everybody's Next One
signature.asc
Description: Digital Signature
__ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers>. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
