On Thu, 14 Jul 2016 15:56:57 +0200, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:

> > If you were able to provide all the "Arch: any" binary packages, failure
> > to build in the official autobuilders would not be serious, then?
> At this point this becomes too theoretical, what you describe here is
> not what a DD usually do. I prefer to remain on the practical side and
> observe than uploading arch indep packages is common, while uploading
> all arch any packages is not.
> -A failures have no impact because the arch all packages are already
> built by the DD. 

I slightly disagree. Since source-only uploads are available (August
2015 also for arch:all package), I and many other pkg-perl members
only do source-only uploads to finally (!) get the advantage of a
rebuild by a build daemon.

> -B failures have a real impact because it renders the
> package unavailable on the architectures other than the one used by the
> DD. Hence the different severity between -A and -B failures.
> So let's remain pragmatic and call "serious" something that is really
> serious for our users.

True, but this also means that users might get packages which are
built in a potentially unclean environment, which is something we
should try to get rid of.
(I have no strong optionion about this specific package or its bug
severity but in general I think we should move to source-only uploads
rather sooner than later.)


 .''`.  Homepage https://info.comodo.priv.at/ - OpenPGP key 0xBB3A68018649AA06
 : :' : Debian GNU/Linux user, admin, and developer -  https://www.debian.org/
 `. `'  Member of VIBE!AT & SPI, fellow of the Free Software Foundation Europe
   `-   NP: Steppenwolf: Everybody's Next One

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital Signature

This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team
Please use
debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.

Reply via email to