Thomas Bushnell BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Goswin von Brederlow [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Thomas Bushnell BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
How about making porters responsible for running the buildds for their
arch?
I consider anyone who runs a buildd for an arch a porter already so
that
Goswin von Brederlow [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The might just be bad porters. Bad dog, BAD.
Then presumably the rest of the porters can replace them?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
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
Goswin von Brederlow [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
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
Thomas Bushnell BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
How about making porters responsible for running the buildds for their
arch?
I consider anyone who runs a buildd for an arch a porter already so
that is already there.
MfG
Goswin
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a
Goswin von Brederlow [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Thomas Bushnell BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
How about making porters responsible for running the buildds for their
arch?
I consider anyone who runs a buildd for an arch a porter already so
that is already there.
If they are unwilling to
On Tue, Dec 06, 2005 at 02:56:28PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 07:46:42PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
The initial upload of libcapplet 1:1.5.11-12 failed to build on alpha,
arm, i386, and mipsel because of a
Andreas Barth [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
* Goswin von Brederlow ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [051206 14:59]:
PS: One thing $random volunteer could do would be patching wanna-build
to Dep-Wait automatically for the obvious cases.
Auto-Dep-Wait works for some months now.
Cheers,
Andi
Aparently not
Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, Dec 06, 2005 at 02:56:28PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 07:46:42PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
The initial upload of libcapplet 1:1.5.11-12 failed to build on
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*
Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 07:46:42PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
The initial upload of libcapplet 1:1.5.11-12 failed to build on alpha,
arm, i386, and mipsel because of a temporarily absent build
dependency. This upload occurred over three weeks
* Goswin von Brederlow ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [051206 14:59]:
PS: One thing $random volunteer could do would be patching wanna-build
to Dep-Wait automatically for the obvious cases.
Auto-Dep-Wait works for some months now.
Cheers,
Andi
--
http://home.arcor.de/andreas-barth/
--
To
On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 07:46:42PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
The initial upload of libcapplet 1:1.5.11-12 failed to build on alpha,
arm, i386, and mipsel because of a temporarily absent build
dependency. This upload occurred over three weeks ago.
On November 17 I requested that the
The initial upload of libcapplet 1:1.5.11-12 failed to build on alpha,
arm, i386, and mipsel because of a temporarily absent build
dependency. This upload occurred over three weeks ago.
On November 17 I requested that the buildds requeue this build, but
nothing has happened. Can the release
14 matches
Mail list logo
