Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting

To: Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org>
Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting
From: Thomas Bushnell BSG <tb@becket.net>
Date: 13 Mar 2005 22:47:15 -0800
Message-id: <[🔎] 87is3uafm4.fsf@becket.becket.net>
In-reply-to: <[🔎] 20050314054458.GB18787@quetzlcoatl.dodds.net>
References: <20050314044505.GA5157@mauritius.dodds.net> <[🔎] 87y8cqakph.fsf@becket.becket.net> <[🔎] 20050314054458.GB18787@quetzlcoatl.dodds.net>

Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> writes:

> The sh and hurd-i386 ports don't currently meet the SCC requirements, as
> neither has a running autobuilder or is keeping up with new packages.

It is impossible for any port under development to meet the SCC
requirements.  We need a place for such ports.  Where will it be?

Thomas

Reply to:

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting
  - From: Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org>

References:
- Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting
  - From: Thomas Bushnell BSG <tb@becket.net>
- Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting
  - From: Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org>

Prev by Date: Re: d-i has 99% support for filesystem labels (was: Re: Serious kernel problems on new i386 hardware)
Next by Date: Re: Restrictive SMTP server
Previous by thread: Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting
Next by thread: Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread