[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 05:12:31PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> writes:
> > > 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.
> Ok, I think I understand.  Suppose that we have an arch that does have
> enough download share, and meets every requirement but the existence
> of sufficient buildds to keep up and developer machines, and that only
> because hardware hasn't come available.  Then it comes available,
> partway through the release cycle.
> All the stuff is on scc; how do we transfer it back?  Will it be easy,
> or a major obstacle?  
> I'm sorry if these questions are too elementary or seem obvious to
> you, but it will help me understand better.

The only differentiating requirement for scc, as opposed to the other
"part of Debian" architectures, seems to be download share.  That won't
suddenly change.

Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC

Reply to: