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

Bug#367709: Call for vote: gcc: requesting libstdc++.udeb

I hereby call for an immediate TC vote on the question of whether a
libstdc++ udeb should be created to support the use of C++ in the 
debian-installer environment, as requested by bug #367709.

The udeb structure was invented for debian-installer, and to date 
Debian has not supported the use of udebs for any other purpose.
In the discussion on this issue recorded in the bug log and on our 
list, it seems clear that the d-i team does not want C++ support in 
the installer environment, and the gcc maintainer is reluctant to 
build and support udebs that the installer team doesn't need.  The 
question before us is therefore whether to support or overrule the 
developer responsible for our gcc packaging, and the developers 
involved in the debian-installer project.

Since this vote may overrule a developer, 6.1.3 of our Constitution 
requires a 3:1 majority of the TC for choice 1.  However, a simple 
majority will suffice for choice 2 to defeat further discussion.

  In the brackets next to your preferred choice, place a 1. Place a 2 in
  the brackets next to your next choice.  Continue until you reach your last
  choice.  Do not enter a number smaller than 1 or larger than 3.  You may
  skip numbers.  You may rank options equally (as long as all choices X you
  make fall in the range 1 <= X <= 3).

  To vote "no, no matter what" rank "Further discussion" as more
  desirable than the unacceptable choices, or You may rank the "Further
  discussion" choice, and leave choices you consider unacceptable
  blank. Unranked choices are considered equally the least desired
  choices, and ranked below all ranked choices. (Note: if the Further
  Discussion choice is unranked, then it is equal to all other unranked
  choices, if any.)

- - -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
[   ] Choice 1: a libstdc++ udeb should be created as per bug #367709
[   ] Choice 2: a libstdc++ udeb should not be created despite bug #367709
[   ] Choice 3: Further discussion
- - -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Reply to: