Re: -= PROPOSAL =- Release sarge with amd64
Stephen Frost <email@example.com> writes:
> * Goswin von Brederlow (firstname.lastname@example.org) wrote:
>> The scripts would still not have been released. Due to the realy
>> wastefull interface buildd.d.o has having them spread around would put
>> a too large drain on buildd.d.o and you would get the same thing that
>> happended with the BTS and bugwatcher. The interface gets blocked or
>> changed to prevent this kind of drain.
> Erm, the request was from someone associated w/ buildd.d.o, aiui. I
> imagine he would known about or figured out such load concerns, and
> besides, if it was on buildd.d.o there might not have been such load, or
> a reduced amount anyway.
If it were on buildd.d.o there would be no load at all. The source
files (<arch>-all.txt) are on buildd.d.o and are fetched from there.
>> That is the non "bad air" reason for not releasing the scripts and
>> that stays valid as long as Ryan doesn't cooperate or we fire up a
>> proxy that exportds a better interface.
> pffft, that reason wasn't ever valid. It's pure BS with the specific
> intent of trying to *look* like you're being all nice and innocent when,
> in reality, you're being just as childish as any 2 year old.
Think what you will. I know why I do what I do and I know and believe
what Ingo told me.