[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

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

On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 12:06:18PM +0000, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> * Hamish Moffatt <hamish@debian.org> [2005-03-14 23:00]:
> > But really, is there much benefit in making *releases* for the SCC
> > architectures?
> For some SSC arches, it *might* not make a difference (possibly m68k)
> but others (e.g. s390 and mipsel) are typically used for servers
> or gateways, and you don't really want to run unstable in such
> environments.  testing+security updates might be a compromise, but
> unstable is clearly not an option for a S390 box or a mipsel Cobalt
> gateway.

OK, that makes sense. Can you buy those architectures new? (Surely yes
in the case of s390 at least, probably mipsel also as the mips CPU
manufacturers are alive and well.)

If those architectures meet the criteria, they would be included in
the release. The announcement anticipated 4 arches meeting the criteria
for etch but didn't set that as a limit.

I guess the <= 2 buildds requirement might be an issue for the embedded
CPUs like mips as unstable continues to grow.

Hamish Moffatt VK3SB <hamish@debian.org> <hamish@cloud.net.au>

Reply to: