Re: Preparing the m68k port for the future.
On Sat, Jan 14, 2006 at 01:42:32AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 13, 2006 at 02:09:19PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 13, 2006 at 01:21:18PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jan 12, 2006 at 07:17:48PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > > > Yes, 'm68k' and 'future' in one sentence. Amazing, isn't it? Surely we
> > > > must be joking?
> > > Hey, I haven't seen any activity wrt m68k archive (re)qualificiation.
> > You haven't been looking good enough, then.
>
> Put it in the wiki along with everyone else where it's obvious.
>
> > > Given m68k's dropped back below the 95% cutoff (and has spent about
> > > 1/3rd of the last 90 days beneath it) and has a number of red squares
> > > still on the release arch qualification page it seems certain at this
> > > point that you won't get a "release arch" exception any time soon.
> > That's being worked on.
>
> That's fine, but it's irrelevant
I beg to differ.
> -- you need to be able to demonstrate you can keep up consistently for
> at least a three month period; at the moment you seem to be at least
> four months away from that, given how long it seems to take m68k to
> catch back up.
I can't make time go faster. All I can do is make sure the problems do
not come back, which I am trying to do as far as is possible.
> That's fine, and there's no reason why m68k can't demonstrate that
> Debian can effectively maintain a "toy" or "embedded" or whathaveyou
> port that's *not* intended to release.
I'm not sure I correctly parse that sentence.
> But it does mean you've got no chance of a release requalification
> anytime soon, which means you need to be proactive about getting an
> archive qualification done.
The point of my previous mail was to demonstrate that I am, in fact,
trying to be proactive about getting the qualification done.
Of course, we all have real life that does get in the way from time to
time. Don't you?
--
.../ -/ ---/ .--./ / .--/ .-/ .../ -/ ../ -./ --./ / -.--/ ---/ ..-/ .-./ / -/
../ --/ ./ / .--/ ../ -/ ..../ / -../ ./ -.-./ ---/ -../ ../ -./ --./ / --/
-.--/ / .../ ../ --./ -./ .-/ -/ ..-/ .-./ ./ .-.-.-/ / --/ ---/ .-./ .../ ./ /
../ .../ / ---/ ..-/ -/ -../ .-/ -/ ./ -../ / -/ ./ -.-./ ..../ -./ ---/ .-../
---/ --./ -.--/ / .-/ -./ -.--/ .--/ .-/ -.--/ .-.-.-/ / ...-.-/
Reply to: