On Sun, 3 Oct 2010 15:57:43 +0200 jaromil <[email protected]> wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA256 > > > > On Sun, Oct 03, 2010 at 09:07:39PM +1030, Karl Goetz wrote: > > > > >>>> upstream development of software: builds at every new commit > > > >>>> and reports failure on building on various platforms (via > > > >>>> mail or irc), ATM we have 32 and 64 bit debian, fedora, > > > >>>> gentoo and ubuntu. > > > > >>> I've thought about such things for various projects im > > > >>> involved in, but maintaining it and debugging requires much > > > >>> time/effort/skill then i have to hand. > > > > >> of course this is a task for sysadmins with time at hand. and > > > >> we know > > > > > > > > Not just sysadmins, thats the problem. it requires developer > > > > input every time a package build fails. (otherwise, what was the > > > > point of the build?) > > > > > > For just our patched packages it seems manageable. To take > > > > managable, yes. but this started as 'builds at every new commit' - a > > very different story. > > yes. developers get noticed if build fails when a patch gets committed > or when the upstream's trunk gets merged (i didn't meant "at every new > commit upstream", but then prolly my fault i wasn't clear enough). the > build failure notice can then go in any kind of tracking system and > get processed when possible. > > i say this just in case we want to scale up and let more people > contribute patches that liberate software. > > i hope is clear i didn't meant to load more "work" on anyone else's > back.
ah, thanks for clarifying :) kk -- Karl Goetz, (Kamping_Kaiser / VK5FOSS) Debian contributor / gNewSense Maintainer http://www.kgoetz.id.au No, I won't join your social networking group
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
