Hi Otto, and Team,

Sorry for made the confusion made in the Team. It's all my fault not
Macros', as I only documented it on wiki and didn't provide additional
communication on mailing. And I have been busy and sick right after
DebConf. And just read this thread by now.

On Sat, Aug 1, 2026 at 9:04 PM Otto Kekäläinen <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi Marcos!
> I am happy to review your MR if you now want to follow-up on this and
> ensure that the actually works for e.g. these packages you modified:
>
> https://salsa.debian.org/go-team/packages/gomuks/-/tree/debian/sid/debian
> https://salsa.debian.org/go-team/packages/fq/-/tree/debian/sid/debian
> https://salsa.debian.org/go-team/packages/lf/-/tree/debian/master/debian
>
> Just tag me @otto in any MR you create and I will try to review it as
> quickly as possible.

Not sure if you read the Go Team Sprint page in phase 2 that we need
rebuild test for Go package that ships executable binary with
dh-golang 1.66+:
  https://wiki.debian.org/DebConf/26/Sprints/DebianGoTeam/GoModBuilds

This way helps us to spot the issues in new dh-golang 1.66 tooling,
And we can share the FTBFS log easily for fixing the corrsponding -dev
package in unstable or fix it it's a bug in dh-golang 1.66.

I don't think we should require experienced DD to submit MR review
like a new contributor for each of rebuild tests with salsa-ci. Can
someone in the team who familar more on salsa-ci help the team on this
directly? Only for the packages that listed on the wiki page for now.

I think it would be much quicker and better to shortern the tooling
transition time, am I correct?

Best regards,
-- 
-Andrew

Reply via email to