On 2/18/26 11:51 PM, Colin Watson wrote:
[CC: removed bug #1127616; added dfsg-team@]
On Mon, Feb 16, 2026 at 09:00:13PM +0100, Philipp Kern wrote:
On 2/12/26 1:11 PM, Ian Jackson wrote:
Sean Whitton writes ("Bug#1127616: developers-reference: should
document using git-debpush to upload"):
I think one source of opposition for autobuilding packages before they
go into NEW is that the DFSG team won't yet has asserted/confirmed that
the license permits autobuilding. But, well, we already have Salsa CI,
so I think that is not worth blocking on.
Indeed.
I don't know much about how the autobuilding system works but I would
love it if someone who did understand that would figure out how to
make this work.
I think I'd strongly prefer not to autobuild code on the existing
systems that has not been vetted yet. So then we'd need a separate
infrastructure for that.
I wouldn't mind if there is the moral equivalent of sending the upload
to Salsa CI and use the outputs for review. But it's not clear to me
if the existing autobuilding system would need to accommodate that.
We'd be open to helping to put something together so that Debusine could
do this, if that's something people would be interested in. Roughly,
there could be a private workspace owned by the DFSG team with
workflow templates that just run sbuild on a given source package (in a
VM, since these haven't been reviewed yet); when the DFSG team's
machinery sees a new source upload for which it doesn't have binaries,
it would upload those artifacts to Debusine and start a workflow to
build them. When the workflow finishes they could fetch the resulting
binaries and stuff them in as supplemental data for the review. They
could run more tests if they wanted, maybe lintian or something, but I'm
guessing they already have arrangements for that.
This would all be a bit best-effort for the time being. We don't have
outgoing webhooks to notify other services about workflow completion
yet, so for now you'd have to poll for completion (I expect we'll
implement outgoing webhooks later this year); and it's not entirely
clear how to handle uploads that build-depend on other things in NEW
(sometimes that would be necessary, but you probably don't want to allow
it automatically). All the same, I think this is one of the easiest
ways to get something like this going.
If the DFSG team is interested in this, then an issue in https://
salsa.debian.org/freexian-team/debusine.debian.net/support/-/issues
would be a good place to talk through the details.
That sounds like an excellent use of Debusine to me.
(I held at Debconf that Debusine will likely need to show value for new
use cases that we cannot accomodate easily with the existing
infrastructure for now.)
Kind regards
Philipp Kern
