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

COUNT(buildd) IN (2,3) (was: Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting)

On Monday 14 March 2005 16:27, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
> If I had to think of a rationale for it, the only one I could think of
> would be "the architecture needs to be fast enough not to block security
> updates".

This is not the only one. Taking days to build some packages also leads to 
shlibs-skew and problems with testing migration. Both which only affect 
tier-1 arches but not those in tier-2.

> However, I consider an update whose $ARCH binaries are released a week
> later not to be a problem.

There is a fundamental problem: There are people (me included) who believe 
that a week delay for a security update is not acceptable.

> Not when the alternate choice is to not have Debian support $ARCH at all.

Please cite where this was proposed. I read the original Nybbles mail (and a 
part of the current thread) but couldn't find the "at all" bit.

Regards, David
- hallo... wie gehts heute?
- *hust* gut *rotz* *keuch*
- gott sei dank kommunizieren wir über ein septisches medium ;)
 -- Matthias Leeb, Uni f. angewandte Kunst, 2005-02-15

Reply to: