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

Bug#766708: Coordinating a plan and requirements for cross toolchain packages in Debian



On Wed, 17 Dec 2014, Helmut Grohne wrote:
> This is an interesting way to put it. Even though I agree that #766708
> has been made non-actionable by waiting too long and thus some form of
> obsoleting that bug is reasonable, collecting it with #771070 under
> the title above seems rather far fetched to me:
> 
>  * This bug is now about cross toolchain packages in Debian whereas
>  #766708 explicitly excluded that consideration.
>
>  * This bug is now about post-jessie whereas #766708 was explicitly
>  about jessie (lengthening transition period) and stated that a
>  resolution would be found post-jessie without the ctte.

The issues underlying both of these bugs are the same. There needs to be
a working cross compilation system for Debian. Whether that happens via
cross toolchains, or some other method, or both is one of issues which
has to be worked out by the involved groups.

> I also note that concern was brought for raising this issue to the
> ctte too quickly. In fact, we now see that I was raising it too
> slowly.

#766708 was raised both too quickly (1 day between filing and
reassigning), and too late (less than one month between the end of
pre-freeze transitioning). Unfortunately, the CTTE takes a very long
time to figure things out, and it's not helped when one of the parties
does not communicate.

> That said, forcemerge and close are quite similar in their effect, so
> no further action seems necessary. I just think that close would have
> been more candid as nothing is left from #766708.

OK. So your opinion is that this issue should be handled outside of the
CTTE?

-- 
Don Armstrong                      http://www.donarmstrong.com

Science is a way of trying not to fool yourself. The first principle
is that you must not fool yourself, and you are the easiest person to
fool.
 -- Richard Feynman "What is and What Should be the Role of Scientific
    Culture in Modern Society"; 1964


Reply to: