Simon Josefsson [11/Feb 9:50pm +01] wrote: >> > NEW uploads should be permitted to be source-only. >> >> This would be a significant improvement. I think binaries needed for >> review by the DFSG team should be autobuilt. > > DFSG Team: do you look at maintainer-uploaded binaries? Why? > > They could be autobuilt, but I wonder what the real purpose of that is. > Only to prove that the source code actually builds against build > dependencies in Debian? That would indeed be a good test. But > binaries aren't needed for that, just a build log from a trusted > builder.
Back when I worked NEW: I very often wanted to see the list of files installed by the package, and the full, expanded list of binary package relationships. Rarely, I would actually look inside the .deb. These are real needs for NEW review. I think one source of opposition for autobuilding packages before they go into NEW is that the DFSG team won't yet has asserted/confirmed that the license permits autobuilding. But, well, we already have Salsa CI, so I think that is not worth blocking on. -- Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
