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

Relaxing testing requirements (was: summarising answers to Vancouver critique)

also sprach David Schmitt <david@schmitt.edv-bus.at> [2005.03.16.1923 +0100]:
> * relaxing "arch-specific" to also be able to exclude KDE/GNOME
> from mips (until someone commits to properly support it for
> whatever reason he has)

Why do we make a package foo's entry to testing dependent on whether
foo has been compiled for all arches, including all dependencies?
Why can't we have separate sid->testing propagation for each arch,
then freeze testing as before, get rid of RC bugs, and release?

Sure, the package set will differ across architectures, but they do

I see the main advantage of this approach to put a little pressure
onto the maintainers of less popular arches, who will have an
interest to make things work for their arch, and thus might try to
persuade others *on an individual basis* to fix their packages for
arches which are currently not supported cleanly.

Am I making sense?

Please do not send copies of list mail to me; I read the list!
 .''`.     martin f. krafft <madduck@debian.org>
: :'  :    proud Debian developer, admin, user, and author
`. `'`
  `-  Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing a system
Invalid/expired PGP subkeys? Use subkeys.pgp.net as keyserver!

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: