Re: vancouver revisited
"Peter 'p2' De Schrijver" <p2@mind.be> wrote in message
[🔎] 20050822091240.GH4737@codecarver">news:[🔎] 20050822091240.GH4737@codecarver...
I think you misunderstood me here. The limit is a upper limit, not a
lower limit.
Perhaps i'm wrong but let me pull up the original message. ...
- the release architecture must have N+1 buildds where N is the number
required to keep up with the volume of uploaded packages
- the value of N above must not be > 2
Ok. If you invert those two and convert them to plain english:
The number of buildds required to keep up with the
volume of uploaded packages must not be greater than two.
There must be that many buildds, in addition there must also be a redundant
buildd.
The key lack-of-word is 'exactly'. If the original message read:
the release architecture must have exactly N+1 buildds where N is the
number ...
then it imposes an upper bound.
However if there is 10 buildds, then it is true that there is 2 buildds.
[the difference is 'the truth' vs. 'the whole truth'].
Just like if I own 2 TVs, it is true that I own a TV. (In many languages
other than english,
the word 'a' == 'one').
--
Never give up! Always surrender!
Reply to: