On Monday 15 January 2018 11:10:18 CET Ansgar Burchardt wrote: > Hardware resources shouldn't be a problem: I'm fairly sure the buildds > were VMs anyway. Jep one VM with reasonable IO each and a second VM mostly due to redundancy requirements > kFreeBSD could have chosen to use another default init system. I don't > think there is any requirement for this to be the same everywhere. The > main problem was that there wasn't anyone willing / having time to > commit to kFreeBSD as far as I remember; not much will happen if that is > the case. Totally. A 1.5 - 2 person port is just not manageable as a release and way to much risk (no redundancy in manpower and such). In the end jessie-kfreebsd was probably more work for release team and ftp masters and others than just having kfreebsd as part of jessie. I guess the hurd example shows that very few people can sucecssfully run a port -- for a release architecture you need a couple more people. Christoph
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.