[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 01:06:05PM +0100, Ingo Juergensmann wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 12:25:13PM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
> > >Sorry for using "stupid", "braindead" and others. But there are no other
> > >words for crap like this, imho.
> > Hmm, while I'm in principle share your point of keeping the architectures
> > it does not sound very sane to be that harsh.  If a group of volunteers
> > faces the situation that they are not able to continue the work they did
> > with the expected quality, they have to face real world and draw a
> > decision.  Normally everything what needed to be done was done and thus
> > if enough people stand up and care for fitting the criteria (98% compiled
> > packages, security for the arch, supporting the kernel).  If there are
> > no such people who do the work talking about "stupid" decisions makes
> > no sense.
> There were offers of help in man power and machines for archs that had
> problems in keeping up. Those were rejected. Punishing those archs for the
> mistakes of those buildd admins rejecting helping hands is just plain
> stupid. The user is the one who will suffer from that "decision". 

Notice that one of the main arch having problem some time back was arm, and
the buildd where maintained by who ? elmo.


Sven Luther

Reply to: