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

To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting
From: Aurélien Jarno <aurelien@aurel32.net>
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 12:12:13 +0100
Message-id: <[🔎] 4235718D.90604@aurel32.net>
In-reply-to: <[🔎] 20050314110540.GA25939@sandbender>
References: <20050314044505.GA5157@mauritius.dodds.net> <[🔎] 20050314110540.GA25939@sandbender>

Robert Lemmen a écrit :

i feel very,very bad about this, but perhaps it's what is needed. i have two
*big* concerns though:

- maintainers will start to downgrade or ignore bugs that are
  arch-specififc if that arch is not in "the" archive. we should have at
  least the requirement that a package must be functional in "the"
  archive + scc to be fit for testing (apart from really arch-specific
  packages of course)

Agreed, this is a very important point if we want to keep sccarchitectures useable.


--
  .''`.  Aurelien Jarno             | GPG: 1024D/F1BCDB73
 : :' :  Debian GNU/Linux developer | Electrical Engineer
 `. `'   aurel32@debian.org         | aurelien@aurel32.net
   `-    people.debian.org/~aurel32 | www.aurel32.net

Reply to:

References:
- Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting
  - From: Robert Lemmen <robertle@semistable.com>

Prev by Date: Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting
Next by Date: Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting
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