On Sun, Feb 18, 2001 at 04:32:07PM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Feb 16, Sam Hartman <hartmans@mit.edu> wrote:
> I agree, it's not acceptable to delay moving packages to testing
> because some build daemons are slow or broken.
> I think a good compromise would be to promote a package to testing when
> it has been compiled for at least n (to be determined) architectures.
The reason we wait for it to be updated on all architectures is so that
all the binaries in testing are built from the same source package. This
is for consistency and just general tidiness.
If some architectures are too slow, then we probably should just get
some more hardware for them.
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.
``_Any_ increase in interface difficulty, in exchange for a benefit you
do not understand, cannot perceive, or don't care about, is too much.''
-- John S. Novak, III (The Humblest Man on the Net)
Attachment:
pgp0uE5gFE6BU.pgp
Description: PGP signature