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

Re: Bug#661565: ITP: nyancat -- Terminal-based Pop Tart Cat animation

Le Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 08:16:03PM +0000, Ben Hutchings a écrit :
> On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 08:25:31PM +0100, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> > * Steve McIntyre <steve@einval.com>, 2012-02-28, 16:20:
> > >I've just done lots of QA work tracking down build failures while
> > >bootstrapping a new architecture, typically in pet packages that
> > >have gone largely unmaintained after a small number of uploads.
> > 
> > Out of curiosity, why are pet packages important for bootstraping a
> > new architecture?
> All build failures have to be investigated and it will take non-zero
> time to discover that such a package is not very important.
> Also, release qualification for architectures
> <http://release.debian.org/wheezy/arch_policy.html> requires building
> the vast majority of the archive (suggested borderline is 98%).

One think that strikes me when I see people with iPhones is that they have a
lot of fun with applications which purpose is to make people laugh and share a
good moment.  I am not sure that this computer would have had the same success
without its application store.  In Debian, we treat all packages equally and
having fun places a high burden on our infrastructure.  It does not fit well
applications that are enjoyable but disposable.  iPhone 5 will not be delayed
if a couple of gag programs can not upgraded.  Couldn't we keep a place in our
namespace and our mirrors for such programs, in a section where best effort is
the rule ?  I do understand it is not that easy; security comes to mind
immediately.  But this is exactly where these application stores have their
value: they go through a filter that is operated by the maker of the operating
system, which the users trust.

Have a nice day,


Reply to: