Re: Vancouver meeting - clarifications
On Sun, Mar 27, 2005 at 03:00:07AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 01:39:27PM +0100, Peter 'p2' De Schrijver wrote:
> > > | - the release architecture must have a working, tested installer
> > > I hope that's obvious why. :)
> > As long as FAI or even raw debootstrap counts, I can agree here.
> No, debootstrap isn't an installer, and shouldn't be counted as such for the
> purpose of release eligibility. If you have to install someone else's
> operating system first to be able to install Debian, then we don't have an
> installer. There *are* reasons that debian-installer has been emphasized as
> much as it has during the sarge release.
But isn't this a completely theoretical discussion regarding etch?
Sarge contains a complete rewrite of the installer.
That it missed the announced date of being completely ready on
October 15th 2003 by that much time might be related to the number of
architectures. But after sarge all 11 architectures have a working
installer and unless the new installer is that bad that the next rewrite
was scheduled for etch, I fail to see how the installer could be a major
obstacle for any of the 11 sarge architectures in etch.
> Steve Langasek
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed