Re: COUNT(buildd) IN (2,3) (was: Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Stephen Gran <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> > Thus the problem is less in the development and more in the support
>> > of testing requirements (all arches in sync) and stable support
>> > (security response time). Therefore the N<=2 requirement is only
>> > needed for tier-1 arches but not for the tier-2 which will not
>> > officially release a stable.
>> What is the detailed reasoning for this requirement anyway ?
> I thought that was fairly clear - a 12 day build of a security fix is
> unacceptable, especially since it hampers getting that fix out the door
> for everyone else.
Then we have to adjust our security support policy. Define Tier-1
archs for security support, release updates for them first. Then for
the others. I fail to see how this could be a problem.
Some people here are looking for problems, when they should be looking
for solutions. Please stop thinking backward.
Julien BLACHE - Debian & GNU/Linux Developer - <email@example.com>
Public key available on <http://www.jblache.org> - KeyID: F5D6 5169
GPG Fingerprint : 935A 79F1 C8B3 3521 FD62 7CC7 CD61 4FD7 F5D6 5169
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.8 <http://mailcrypt.sourceforge.net/>
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----