Re: Release sprint results - team changes, auto-rm and arch status
On 2013-11-28 21:24, Daniel Pocock wrote:
> I've found the builds on the less used architectures have been useful
> for flushing out unusual bugs, particularly when the code ships with
> many test cases and it exposes problems for big endian machines, etc.
> Also, kFreeBSD and HURD are both kind of special in that they are not
> Linux, it would be good to keep one or the other around even if other
> architectures are culled more aggressively.
Keeping them around is different from them being considered as release
architectures (or even just keeping them in testing). Keeping these
architectures in testing do involve a burden, like blocking testing
migration when they FTBFS.
In theory they could all stay in sid provided that the relevant teams
approve it. I believe the FTP masters are the authority on that.
However, I would not be surprised if DSA were to object to maintaining
machines running sid.
 Having them in testing as a "F***ED" and "BREAK" arch would remove
that burden, but you might as well just use sid then.