Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting
Hamish Moffatt <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 01:17:03PM +0100, Ingo Juergensmann wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 11:00:22PM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
>> > But really, is there much benefit in
>> > making *releases* for the SCC architectures?
>> What will happen is something like this:
>> A: "Oh, let's see what we got here.... a nice Alpha server..."
>> B: "Let us install Debian on it!"
>> *browsing the web*
>> A: "Oh, no release of Debian for Alpha... it's unsupported..."
>> B: "Sad... it's a nice machine, but without a working Linux on it, we're gonna
>> throw it away...."
> It's unsupported officially, but unstable is still available.
> The porters could do their own release if they wished.
Not realy. Scc only has unstable snapshots proposed. Thats no way
> It would be interesting to hear how NetBSD/OpenBSD handles this
> situation, as they have a lot of ports. (Of course they have far fewer
> packages than we do so their problem is on a much smaller scale.)
> Do they release new versions on all ports at once?
> Hamish Moffatt VK3SB <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org>