Re: Release sprint results - team changes, auto-rm and arch status
On 23 December 2013 16:54, Niels Thykier <niels@thykier.net> wrote:
> On 2013-12-23 00:54, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote:
>> On 22 December 2013 16:56, Cyril Brulebois <kibi@debian.org> wrote:
>>> Dimitri John Ledkov <xnox@debian.org> (2013-12-22):
>>>> On 28 November 2013 20:04, Niels Thykier <niels@thykier.net> wrote:
>>>>> * Architecture Status
>>>>> * ia64 in danger
>>>>> * sparc/ppc/mips/kfreebsd at risk
>>>>> * s390 dropped from testing
>>>>
>>>> Is "ppc" - powerpc or ppc64?
>>>
>>> powerpc. (For ppc64, same answer as below.)
>>>
>>>> Is ppc64 looking healthy enought to become a release architecture for
>>>> jessie?
>>>
>>> Not in the archive, therefore not something we can release.
>>>
>>>> What about x32? Is it going to become a release architecture for
>>>> jessie?
>>>
>>> Same answer as above.
>>
>> Pardon my ignorance but:
>>
>> * how do architectures move from ports to the archive?
>
> They are accepted into the archive by the FTP masters. This step is (as
> I understand it) largely between the FTP masters and the
> porters/advocates of that architecture (see [1]).
>
> [1] http://ftp-master.debian.org/archive-criteria.html
>
>> * And does such a move require them to become "official" architectures?
>
> Not sure what "official" is defined as (in this context). But I suppose
Well, I was going by the "official" term from
http://www.debian.org/ports/ which also doesn't seem to define what it
means. E.g. stable, stable+testing, stable+testing+sid, or
testing+sid, sid-only. Any combo, as long as it's in the archive?
--
Regards,
Dimitri.
Reply to: