Re: armhf / s390x
* Adam D. Barratt (firstname.lastname@example.org) [120105 18:07]:
> The nett result is that with a few small hammers (a force-hint for a
> dozen or so binary packages, a couple of urgents and a couple of forces
> to handle missing mipsel builds) we add ~4500 packages for each of armhf
> and s390x to testing, the vast majority of which are installable.
> Those are somewhat annoying, but I think we can live with them in the
> short term given that they're not armhf or s390x issues as such.
I'd say then: add both arches to testing, and we can always look
at the minor details later on (as long as these arches don't block
testing migration of course).