Re: Will the amd64 port be rejected because of the 98% rule?

To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: Will the amd64 port be rejected because of the 98% rule?
From: "Joe Smith" <unknown_kev_cat@hotmail.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 00:44:09 -0400
Message-id: <[🔎] dee9ir$fs4$1@sea.gmane.org>
References: <[🔎] 20050822091335.GA31802@andaco.de><[🔎] 87pss6tc5j.fsf@toncho.dhh.gt.org> <[🔎] 20050822213608.GI30874@p12n.org> <[🔎] 87pss5bfgw.fsf@informatik.uni-tuebingen.de>

By the way, i386 does not make the cut according to the vancouver
prospect due to the number of buildds required. So are we left with 0
archs in etch? :) That will certainly speed up the release.

LOL.

Release NOW! Release now, damnit!
I think it will be our fastest and smoothest release ever.

Reply to:

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Will the amd64 port be rejected because of the 98% rule?
  - From: Adrian von Bidder <avbidder@fortytwo.ch>

References:
- Will the amd64 port be rejected because of the 98% rule?
  - From: Andreas Jochens <aj@andaco.de>
- Re: Will the amd64 port be rejected because of the 98% rule?
  - From: John Hasler <jhasler@debian.org>
- Re: Will the amd64 port be rejected because of the 98% rule?
  - From: Peter Samuelson <peter@p12n.org>
- Re: Will the amd64 port be rejected because of the 98% rule?
  - From: Goswin von Brederlow <brederlo@informatik.uni-tuebingen.de>

Prev by Date: Re: More pbuilder use!
Next by Date: Re: Bug#323855: ITP: opencvs -- OpenBSD CVS implementation with special emphasis in security
Previous by thread: Re: Will the amd64 port be rejected because of the 98% rule?
Next by thread: Re: Will the amd64 port be rejected because of the 98% rule?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread