On 04-01 21:16, Matt Turner wrote: > On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 8:55 PM, Mark Hymers <mhy@debian.org> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > As mentioned in the recent ftp-team meeting minutes, we're planning to > > remove alpha and hppa from unstable. They were removed from testing > > before the squeeze release and there's no sign that they will be release > > architectures for wheezy. As such, we're planning to remove them from > > unstable and experimental in the next few days. buildd support for > > unstable and experimental will also be ended at that time, but will > > obviously continue for lenny updates / security builds. > Might want to hold off on that for alpha. There's been a flurry of > emails in the last week working to revive it. I agree, we should discuss it. Me, and few other persons from debian-alpha is already working to improve state of alpha (which in my opinion is quite good actually). Removing alpha from unstable, and disabling buildd will make it much more hard to work on bringing port more up to date. Actually I'm currently configuring to machines to act as buildd to make current setup more redundant and faster, and actually provide them for wheezy. I think port do not have any significant technical issues right now, beyond these which we are already working (and they will be fixed soon). Problem with lack of squeezy for alpha, looks to be a more problem of lack of free time by few alpha port maitainer, and there was actually very few of them. By recent activity on mailing list and actuall information of this maintainers, it looks there could be some more interest at making alpha still life, and bringing it back to debian wheezy. I also reviewed about 10 bug reports marked as critical in past few days, and non still applied to the alpha in ustable. Everything looks to be fixed, or unreproductible. So, please tell as more about reasoning behind decision and what we can do to make alpha port for wheezy a possible option. Regards, Witek -- Witold Baryluk
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature