Re: -= PROPOSAL =- Release sarge with amd64
On Thu, Jul 15, 2004 at 11:15:06PM +0100, Ian Lynagh wrote:
> > > Debian, thank god, is not a democracy. We do not decide on
> > > issues based on popularity (else we'd be distributing windows
> > > shareware). We make decisions based on technical merits,
> > Suuuuure. Then what's holding up AMD64? For that matter, why were Ingo's
> > buildd status page scripts never integrated?
> About 3 weeks ago I asked him for the source for the source to the
> "Package status (all archs)" part of www.buildd.net so I could run it
> myself actually for all arches rather than just those he felt were
> worthy; he refused. I don't know if he was more forthcoming with source
> etc with them, when trying to get it added to buildd.debian.org, than he
> was with me, but the experience has left me unconvinced that his side of
> the original dialogue was faultless.
Ryan already rejected the offer. The offer just a "Hey, how about to run the
crest stuff on buildd.d.o and extend it to all archs... it would be nice to
have all information in one place!"
He put down the offer, so we/I made my own site. He have had his chance.
And I told you that the current setup is in progress and will be adopted to
multibuild. As a third, you should be able to understand that I don't want
to throw away all my invested time *and* money to support a rival site that
is working with my setup.
You still has the possibility to convince the missing archs to participate.
I think a simple cronjob is not that much of a problem to get your favorite
arch listed on buildd.net...
> To be fair, debian-admin then ignored my mail re having suitable
> Berkeley-db-like packages installed on a suitable machine so I could
> write my own.
So, we can note to the records: you got an answer from me at least, while
you haven't from DSA. Thank you for supporting our complaint!
--
Ciao... //
Ingo \X/
Reply to: