Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting
Darren Salt wrote:
I demand that Anthony Towns may or may not have written...
Put them behind a firewall on a trusted LAN, use them to develop software
for arm chips, and then just follow unstable or run non-security-supported
snapshots. Apart from writing software for embedded arm things, I can't see
"Linux desktop box" comes to mind...
But why would you spend over 1000 pounds on an arm Linux desktop box
instead of a few hundred pounds on a random i386 desktop box?
A reasonable answer is because you're developing for arm's for embedded
applications; but if so, what's the big deal with using unstable or
snapshots, and running your public servers on other boxes?
-- and if an arch is just going to be used for development, does it really
need all the support we give stable in order to make it useful for servers
Probably not, but ISTM that you'll first have to ascertain that it *is* only
being used for development before you can say that that support definitely
Uh, you've got that round the wrong way: you don't do something because
you can't say support definitely isn't needed, you do something because
you *can* say support definitely *is* needed.
If so, why? If not, what level of support does it need, that goes beyond
"unstable + snapshotting facility", and why? Debian developers [...]
You're focusing too much on development here. There are users too, you
Haven't seen any evidence of it -- developers and vendors, yes, users,
or uses, no...