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

Re: Please allow the migration of the packages stalled in the MIPS buildd backlog.



Because they don't want to.

William

On Sun, 2008-03-02 at 17:30 -0500, Michael Casadevall wrote:
> What about simply decoupling mips/mipsel's version numbers so an out of 
> date package on mips(el) doesn't stall out the rest of the testing. Having 
> (somewhat) setup britney/update_out to generate testing for m68k, it 
> should just be  a matter of adding of adding mips and mipsels, to the 
> proper lists in  update_out.py. As it stand armel uses this (hence why in 
> update_excuses it says Ignoring armel dependency).
> 
> As I haven't fully gotten britney running, there could obviously be a big 
> problem, but it might be a fessible way to allow mips/mipsel to have 
> testing, and not break everyone else.
> Michael
> 
> On Sun, 2 Mar 2008, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> 
> > Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2008 18:57:03 +0100
> > From: Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@lucas-nussbaum.net>
> > To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> > Subject: Re: Please allow the migration of the packages stalled in the MIPS
> >     buildd backlog.
> > Resent-Date: Sun,  2 Mar 2008 19:26:18 +0000 (UTC)
> > Resent-From: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> > 
> > On 02/03/08 at 23:34 +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> >> I have not asked MIPS to be removed from the list of released
> >> architectures. I have asked testing migration to be uncoupled from MIPS
> >> building while the buildds are suffering. In a previous thread it has
> >> been suggested that this operation requires a minimal amount of work.
> >
> > It requires a minimal amount of work to remove mips from the
> > architectures considered for testing transitions. On the other hand, it
> > requires a lot of work if we still want to release with mips after that,
> > because from that point, testing and testing-mips will start diverging.
> > Getting them back in sync will be really hard, and actually, it's likely
> > to cause us to release without mips.
> >
> > So, even if it would be better to have testing be in good state, it's
> > not a release blocker yet, and developers should concentrate on fixing
> > bugs. Users can use testing + apt pinning. I use that on all my !stable
> > systems.
> > --
> > | Lucas Nussbaum
> > | lucas@lucas-nussbaum.net   http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/ |
> > | jabber: lucas@nussbaum.fr             GPG: 1024D/023B3F4F |
> >
> >
> > --
> > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
> > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
> >
> >
> 
> 

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part


Reply to: