On Mon 2017-08-14 21:02:38 +0200, Ansgar Burchardt wrote: > The reason we currently require NEW uploads to include binary package is > that they are easier to review than source-only uploads w.r.t. what will > actually end up in a binary package.
So what if someone™ made a dedicated auto-builder that generated binary
packages from source-only uploads in NEW, and you could review those
binary packages? would that resolve this part of the conern?
> Some bits of the tools also assume that binaries are included.
which bits are those? are they documented somewhere so that people who
want to fix them can fix them?
> I'm not sure we should throw away included binaries either; that just
> means two packages with the same version, but different contents
> exist.
with reproducible builds, that shouldn't be an issue, right?
> Eventually moving to source-only uploads also for NEW seems to be the
> better solution to me. That's why I set the bug to "wontfix" for now.
I agree that this is a better solution for the future.
Is there a bug report for moving to source-only uploads for NEW? I'd
happily move this discussion over there.
--dkg
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
