Re: testing and no release schedule
On Fri, Mar 26, 2004 at 09:12:42PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > A lot of them. However, that's not the point. The point was to stop making
> > excuses. If niche (politically correct term for dead) architectures are
> > holding up the release, then let's release without them.
>
> If I understand you correctly, every architecture except i386 is a
> "dead" architecture since most likely > 95% of all Debian users use
> Debian in i386.
I would say there are 4 or 5 architectures that would be worth putting into
the 'core', which should cover more than 99% of our installed base. I'm not
going to get into specifics because it would be a waste of time at this
point.
> > I think we are in agreement that this is a management problem, and not
> > necessarily a manpower problem. I also don't know if it's a solvable
> > problem, since solving it will require a change in Debian's culture at the
> > highest levels.
>
> I see that it causes additional work to support many architectures, but
> I can't see that there would be specific architectures to blame.
Then my point is valid. Supporting many architectures is not a valid
excuse for our long release cycle.
--Adam
--
Adam McKenna <adam@debian.org> <adam@flounder.net>
Reply to: