Re: my thoughts on the Vancouver Prospectus
On Sat, Mar 19, 2005 at 09:13:07AM +0100, Karsten Merker wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2005 at 06:44:46PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > [cc:ed back to -devel, since these are technical questions being raised and
> > answered]
>
> > > * Why is the permitted number of buildds for an architecture restricted to
> > > 2 or 3?
> >
> > - Architectures which need more than 2 buildds to keep up with package
> > uploads on an ongoing basis are very slow indeed; while slower,
> > low-powered chips are indeed useful in certain applications, they are
> > a) unlikely to be able to usefully run much of the software we currently
> > expect our ports to build, and b) definitely too slow in terms of
> > single-package build times to avoid inevitably delaying high-priority
> > package fixes for RC bugs.
>
> a) is true for some big packages like GNOME and KDE, but that
> does not impede the architecture's usefulness for other software
> we have in the archive.
Also it is an example of ridiculously large source packages, which
create other problems by themself like the amount of bandwidth wasted
when one has to apply a one-line fix, in particular for security updates.
Why not considering splitting those source packages? IIRC, this is
planned for the X11 source packages. This seems a better option overall.
Cheers,
--
Bill. <ballombe@debian.org>
Imagine a large red swirl here.
Reply to: