On Mon, Jan 29, 2007 at 11:40:00PM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote: > On Mon, Jan 29, 2007 at 11:04:12AM +0100, Aurelien Jarno wrote: > > Goswin von Brederlow a écrit : > > > Aurelien Jarno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > >> One first step would be to keep the current build daemons maintainers > > >> (ie the person who signs the upload), and give and access to some > > >> porters to the wanna-build database. This way they could reschedule > > >> failed builds, add dep-wait, or do binNMU. If I am right Steve Langasek > > >> already has access to the wanna-build database of all architectures, so > > >> that should not be a technical problem. > > > > > > I think from a technical point every buildd admin has access to > > > wanna-build for all architectures. It is just policy not to mess > > > around in someone elses backyard. > > > > You think wrong. Using the public ldap database, you can find the > > following details: > > Why is w-b access so sacred?
It's not that it's sacred; it's that w-b uses a Berkeley DB with a database-level lock for every access (including read-only access); so giving such access to everyone who asks for it will interfere with proper buildd operation. -- <Lo-lan-do> Home is where you have to wash the dishes. -- #debian-devel, Freenode, 2004-09-22 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
