Re: Porter roll call for Debian Stretch
On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 3:54 PM, Matthias Klose <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On 20.09.2016 23:46, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
>> On 09/20/2016 11:16 PM, Niels Thykier wrote:
>>> - powerpc: No porter (RM blocker)
>> I'd be happy to pick up powerpc to keep it for Stretch. I'm already
>> maintaining powerpcspe which is very similar to powerpc.
> No, you are not maintaining powerpcspe as a release architecture, and that's
> something different than building packages for some of the ports architectures.
> If you can get powerpcspe accepted as a release architecture, then maybe you
> gain some credibility to maintain another release architecture ;)
[Let's assume that we can't find a powerpc porter in time for Stretch.]
1. Will `powperpc` automatically be downgraded to simple port ? Or is
this also not automated and the port may simply be removed (eg. sparc)
2. Apart from loosing the automatic debian-installer stuff, what else
are we going to loose in that scenario ?
Thanks much for pointers !