On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 05:43:05PM +0200, Alexander Wirt wrote: > I don't understand, we had sloppy for lenny and I thought we had consensus to > have it again for squeeze. Sloppy was announced some tim ago: > http://backports-master.debian.org/news/lenny-backports-sloppy_created/ I wasn't very happy back then either. It was sort of rushed through in some private IRC pings about me setting it up on the wanna-build side. All I'm saying is if it would be possible to review the arguments, having had the experience for one cycle. It's sad that we do not currently scale on the buildd side, but that's how it is.[1] (And it's likely to take a month until all buildds have implemented it, given the current speed of any buildd updates needing to take place.) Kind regards Philipp Kern [1] Apart from the name of the suite still being slightly off from what I expect of Debian.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature