This one time, at band camp, Henning Makholm said: > Scripsit David Nusinow <david_nusinow@verizon.net> > > >> Do they? The announcement looks noticeably different. > > > My interpretation of the announcement, and this also comes from > > talking with some of the people involved, is that this affords ports > > with the flexibility to do as they please without slowing down the > > rest of the project. > > That interpretation does not fit the announcement that actually got > posted to debian-devel-announce. > > The announcement that actually got posted says that the only > architectures that will be allowed to have "testing" and eventually > "stable" after sarge releases will be i386, ia64, powerpc, and amd64. > > All other architectures have the "flexibility" to either stick with > unstable and only unstable, or leave the project. Boo-yeah. No. The actual line is: | We project that applying these rules for etch will reduce the set of | candidate architectures from 11 to approximately 4 [...] "We project that the architectures that will have enough porter support" is not the same as "We refuse to allow any but the following". It is not a pronouncement, it is proposal, with guesses involved. Is it really that difficult to understand? -- ----------------------------------------------------------------- | ,''`. Stephen Gran | | : :' : sgran@debian.org | | `. `' Debian user, admin, and developer | | `- http://www.debian.org | -----------------------------------------------------------------
Attachment:
pgp4VJ7V_SGrC.pgp
Description: PGP signature