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 <firstname.lastname@example.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