On Sat, Jan 12, 2008 at 11:51:14AM +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> ISTR it was intended to ensure the package at least builds fine in the
> developer's environment, to reduce FTBFSes. I wasn't there at that time
> though, but I've been told several times that I'll be an old DD before
> it gets a chance to be changed. I guess you can call it historical.
The most precise reference to this issue it comes to my mind is:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2007/01/msg00760.html
In that mail it is well explained (or at least, it is explained in a way
I agree with) why we should require *also* binary packages to be
uploaded. However, it is not well motivated IMO why we shouldn't, for
example, upload them and throw them away afterwards (see footnote [4],
with which I personally disagree). The point of not having resources I'm
quite sure can be mitigated.
Feel free to revamp the discussion.
Cheers.
--
Stefano Zacchiroli -*- PhD in Computer Science ............... now what?
zack@{upsilon.cc,cs.unibo.it,debian.org} -<%>- http://upsilon.cc/zack/
(15:56:48) Zack: e la demo dema ? /\ All one has to do is hit the
(15:57:15) Bac: no, la demo scema \/ right keys at the right time
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature