also sprach David Schmitt <firstname.lastname@example.org> [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 already... 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 <email@example.com> : :' : 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!
Description: Digital signature