The debian-private mailing list leak, part 1. Volunteers have complained about Blackmail. Lynchings. Character assassination. Defamation. Cyberbullying. Volunteers who gave many years of their lives are picked out at random for cruel social experiments. The former DPL's girlfriend Molly de Blanc is given volunteers to experiment on for her crazy talks. These volunteers never consented to be used like lab rats. We don't either. debian-private can no longer be a safe space for the cabal. Let these monsters have nowhere to hide. Volunteers are not disposable. We stand with the victims.
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Core release test bed

richard@a42.deep-thought.org (Richard Jones)  wrote on 23.02.97 in <m0vyWS9-0024vzC@a42.deep-thought.org>:

>  Mike Neuffer <mike@i-Connect.Net> wrote:	

... and for some reason, I haven't seen that mail  ...

> > On 22 Feb 1997, Kai Henningsen wrote:

> > > I don't think this is quite as problematic as it first looks, as long as
> > > we don't junk what we already have.
> > >
> > > That is, keep the stuff separated in packages. Make some policy
> > > decisions that essentially say, standard level stuff must not ever
> > > depend on stuff with lower priority, neither for build nor for use.
> > >
> > > And devise a test bed that can batch-compile all the standard packages
> > > from one tree. At least for a release, the test bed must be able to
> > > recreate all the standard packages, from an environment consisting of
> > > the very same standard packages, otherwise no release.
> > >
> > > And it doesn't mean any change in what the maintainers or users actually
> > > do, except when we find bugs that way. It should, however, improve
> > > release quality.
> >
> > Yes, it would mean, that all maintainers cease to upload binary packages.

No way.

That would mean that *everybody* who wants to test unstable needs to build  
at home.

I really, *really* hate that idea.

Keep the current source and binary packages for unstable. For releases ...

> > For releases we would need one dedicated machine per architecture that
> > compiles everything and then creates the binary packages which get put on
> > the FTP server.

... do this.

> > > If nobody else wants to do it, I could look into the mechanics of such a
> > > test bed. Something like a test bed package, that just needs access to a
> > > local mirror and a large enough bootable partition to work on, so that
> > > everybody who wants to can do this test - the more people do this, the
> > > faster we find those bugs.
> > >
> > > Comments?
> >
> > Go ahead. But it shouldn't be a package. We already have cvsup as Debian

Of course it should. That's how we make stuff available. And I see no  
reason at all why we would not want to make this available.

Cvsup may be nice, but this is the interface between our packages (binary  
and source alike) and cvsup, or whatever we'll use.

Cvsup doesn't grok .dsc/.deb, and dpkg{-*} doesn't grok cvsup.


MfG Kai


--
Please respect the confidentiality of material on the debian-private list.
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-private-REQUEST@lists.debian.org . Trouble? e-mail to Bruce@Pixar.com