[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting

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

Reply to: