[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Plan B for kfreebsd

On 10/11/14 at 22:09 +0000, Steven Chamberlain wrote:
> Petr Salinger wrote:
> > >Jonathan Wiltshire wrote:
> > >>[...] though we do hope that the
> > >>porters will be able to make a simultaneous unofficial release.
> > 
> > It is unclear, what we have to duplicate. Do we stay in testing ?
> I'd like to know this as soon as possible as it affects our planning.
> Thanks.


I fully understand and support the decision of our release team to not
include kfreebsd-* as an official architecture in jessie. However, even
if it is understandably too difficult to support as an architecture
officially part of our stable releases, I think that kfreebsd-* is
widely considered as a great asset for Debian (similarly to our other
non-Linux port, and unofficial architectures on debian-ports.org).
Not just for the obvious coolness factor of having official or
semi-official ports for kfreebsd, hurd, x32, m68k, etc. but also because
working on those ports has proven able to uncover issues that affect
other architectures, and to robustify Debian as a whole.

I would love to see the kfreebsd team keep kfreebsd-* as close as
possible from an official release architecture, and I would like to
re-state that, if that's helpful, Debian funds could be allocated to
that effect. (Note that, concretely, I don't really see how Debian funds
could help here; but you might have more ideas)


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: