Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting
On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 07:37:51AM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
> In general I would like to say that supporting a lot of architectures was
> an important difference between Debian and other distributions. I know the
In fact it was one of the 2 main reasons for my choice. apt-get was the other
main reason.
> drawbacks of this but I just do not want to hide my opinion that I do not
> like the idea of reducing the number of supported architectures that
> drastical.
> IMHO the effect would be that people will start forking Debian for porting
> issues and we will loose the power of those porters while they will spend
> time for things they would not have to do else.
And the userbase will get smaller. It's not unlikey that I will power off
all non-supported archs then and migrate to another distribution that has
not those internal problems like Debian. And I think that I won't be the
only one.
IMHO scc.d.o will result in focussing on those archs, making it worse and
worse for the other archs. Implementing scc.d.o is equally to dropping those
older archs in my eyes. It's just another wording.
> I think we should at least vote about such a drastic change.
A voting about total nonsense? I think we had that already with that SC
editorial changes vote last year, which showed that Debian is very good at
harming itself.
And furthermore: the support of all those DPL candidates really saddens me.
All the work and support over all those years by all those users and porters
will be vanished with that stupid idea, imho.
It would be better when the project would be honest and state that it want
to become a x86-compatible only distribution (with the small tribute to
powerpc users) than this braindead thingie.
Sorry for using "stupid", "braindead" and others. But there are no other
words for crap like this, imho.
--
Ciao... //
Ingo \X/
Reply to: