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

Re: possible compromise for ITP: linux?

On Mon, 2003-11-10 at 19:31, Adam Heath wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Nov 2003, Santiago Vila wrote:
> > If Robert is such an incompetent developer as some people say and the
> > package does not build on the 11 different architectures, then the
> > package will not propagate to testing and the world will be safe from
> > the disaster.
> You misunderstand how testing works.
> If a *new* package doesn't build on some arch, it won't be held up from
> testing because of it.
> It's only when an *existing* package that *previously* built on some arch, and
> now it doesn't, that testing will ignore it.

Given that we know Linux does in fact compile and run on all those
architectures (by virtue of the fact we have them in the first place), I
think it would be fair to insist that Robert's package do the same
before it propagates to testing. He's stated numerous times that the
porting is just packaging work and that he's capable of doing it.

I am not sure of the best technical way to make this happen, though.
Joe Wreschnig <piman@debian.org>

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply to: