Re: buildd/porter/maintainer roles again

2010-07-12 Thread Bernd Zeimetz
On 07/12/2010 10:49 PM, Sune Vuorela wrote: > On 2010-07-12, Clint Adams wrote: >> On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 10:24:19PM +0300, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: >>> I think it should be. Or the porters should monitor the builds on their >>> architecture to be able to detect FTBFS and act on them, without the >>

Re: buildd/porter/maintainer roles again

2010-07-12 Thread Sune Vuorela
On 2010-07-12, Clint Adams wrote: > On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 10:24:19PM +0300, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: >> I think it should be. Or the porters should monitor the builds on their >> architecture to be able to detect FTBFS and act on them, without the >> maintainer having to manually ping them. > > If

Re: buildd/porter/maintainer roles again

2010-07-12 Thread Clint Adams
On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 10:24:19PM +0300, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > I think it should be. Or the porters should monitor the builds on their > architecture to be able to detect FTBFS and act on them, without the > maintainer having to manually ping them. If I were a porter, I would not bother doing t

Re: buildd/porter/maintainer roles again

2010-07-12 Thread Lucas Nussbaum
On 12/07/10 at 18:05 +, Clint Adams wrote: > Shouldn't it be the responsibility of the buildd admin > (if, for some reason, the buildd admin is not a porter) > to notify an architecture's porters of any porting issues > manifesting themselves in a package build? I think it should be. Or the po

buildd/porter/maintainer roles again

2010-07-12 Thread Clint Adams
Shouldn't it be the responsibility of the buildd admin (if, for some reason, the buildd admin is not a porter) to notify an architecture's porters of any porting issues manifesting themselves in a package build? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject o