Re: Release sprint results - team changes, auto-rm and arch status
Le 28/11/2013 21:52, Niels Thykier a écrit :
>> 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.
And what about (somehow automatically, like RC-buggy packages) removing
packages from testing only on these architectures?