Alexandre Viau: >>> That was a bad understanding of the QA page from my part [1]. Actually >>> can somebody explain why 1.1.1 is in the "testing" column? >> Becuase you didn't fix the build failure of 1.1.1+dfsg1-1 and >> 1.1.1+dfsg1-2 quickly enough, like, in December when they happened, and >> instead waited for the bug to raised to RC in end January and then >> fixing it at end February. > That wasn't my question. I always thought that if 1.1.1 was in the > "testing" column, it meant that it was available in "testing". > > Can you explain why 1.1.1+dfsg1-2 is in the testing column and > 1.1.1+dfsg1-4 in the "unstable" column? > > 1.1.1 is not in testing nor in unstable. So what does it mean? >
It could be due to "Built-Using" - if your package is mentioned in a "Built-Using" field, dak will ensure that the source package is present in the relevant suites. This can create the effect that a source "is in testing" without really being so. If this is the case, then it suggests that the QA page still does not properly ignore source packages with the "Extra-Source-Only" field (or whatever it is called). Thanks, ~Niels
