[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 04:38:35PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> writes:

> > The inclusion of ia64 in the release count is a projection, based on
> > where I believe things are today.  Nothing the release team is doing
> > ensures that ia64 is going to be a viable port, a year from now when
> > we're trying to release etch; and nothing says that one or more of the
> > other ports won't be in a position to meet those criteria and get added
> > to the release list.

> How can they be, since they will be off in another archive?  You can't
> decide now to put an arch in scc and at the same time say you won't
> know whether it's in tier1 or tier2 until etch is close to release.

Please re-read the proposal.  Not all the architectures proposed for
release with etch are architectures that have enough download share to
justify keeping them on the primary mirror network; these are
*separate*, if heirarchically related, requirements.

Releasing archs via scc.debian.org (and mirror network) is not an
obstacle, because scc.debian.org vs. ftp.debian.org is a *mirroring*
convenience only.  The uploads still all go through
ftp-master.debian.org, which is where the release action happens.

Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: