On Mon, Aug 22, 2005 at 03:34:16PM +0200, Martin Pitt wrote: > W. Borgert [2005-08-22 14:37 +0200]: > > Quoting Matthew Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > I used to think that too. I took a wander through queue/reject on merkel. > > > I don't think that any more. I'm curious as to how Ubuntu is going to > > > sustain source-only uploads, honestly.
> > Mandatory, signed build and test logs? I've no idea... > Ubuntu does not do anything of that sort. If I merely fix a > description or add a Recommends:, I don't need to bother with > rebuilding the package locally, and if I fix something bigger, I need > to build and test the package anyway. > The system of source uploads works well in Ubuntu, so please don't try > to invent problems which don't matter in reality. So, hmm, what about the anecdotal evidence of some Ubuntu maintainers doing 3-4 sequential uploads of a package before finally uploading a version that is buildable from source *anywhere*? -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
