[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

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

On Mon, Aug 22, 2005 at 06:59:52AM -0500, John Hasler wrote:
> Andreas Jochens writes:
> Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > - must have successfully compiled 98% of the archive's source (excluding
> >   arch-specific packages)

> Andreas Jochens writes:
> > It is not possible to build 98% of the unmodified source packages from 
> > the 'unstable' distribution. This is true for any port including i386.

> Make it 98% of the packages buildable on the accepted port with the highest
> build percentage.

> How was 98% arrived at?

It's an arbitrary line, but then, any such line would have to be drawn at an
arbitrary point.  Requiring 100% is unrealistic, because it would give
porters a perverse incentive to argue for per-architecture exclusion of
packages; relaxing the percentage to a lower number gives us the situation
we had in sarge, where too much time was spent waiting on one architecture
or another for updates to testing.

I certainly think that the metric needs to take into account
Packages-arch-specific.  None of the statistics we have available today are
quite right; I think they're all either "percent built of all packages this
arch has ever built", which doesn't account for archs not keeping up with
new packages, or "percent built of all packages we have source for", which
penalizes ports unnecessarily for the upload of non-portable sources.

Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
vorlon@debian.org                                   http://www.debian.org/

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: