Re: Accepted orbit2 1:2.14.19-0.3 (source amd64)
On Fri, 22 Nov 2013, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
>
> m68k computers like Amigas and Ataris have an incredibly large fanbase
m68k was never as "incredibly" popular as (for example) x86. But all
architectures ultimately die in a commercial sense. If F/OSS process can't
accomodate a legacy m68k port then how will it handle the present decline
of x86 or any other architecture?
If the wider F/OSS community can muster sufficient resources to create a
viable fork of a F/OSS codebase (like orbit2) then there's sufficient
reason for Debian to funnel that effort through its own project because
that way the Debian project stands to benefit indirectly.
IMHO, if Josselin were to argue convincingly that the community is unable
to create a viable fork of orbit2 (a patch rejection from upstream may
help to make that case) then dropping the patch could be justified.
Finn
* "...sales this quarter dropped to their lowest volume since 2008.
Consumers' shift from PCs to tablets for daily content consumption
continued to decrease the installed base of PCs..."
[Gartner, via Forbes]
Reply to: