Re: Release sprint results - team changes, auto-rm and arch status
Le Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 04:45:10PM +0100, Daniel Pocock a écrit :
>
> It could be argued that the "cost" of these other architectures is not a
> one-sided equation - their presence contributes in some way to the
> overall quality of the software that people include in Debian. So the
> net cost may be lower than people really think, but of course that
> doesn't take away the fact that it is a cost that has to be paid to keep
> these ports there.
Hello Daniel,
I think that the mere ‘presence’ as a release architecture sould not be counted
on the positive side of the equation, because one can definitely perform mass
screening for bugs by rebuilding the archive on non-release architectureps.
This is similar in spirit to the Mayhem project that reported 4,801 bugs this
summer (http://forallsecure.com/mayhem.html).
Having Debian as an intermediate between mass-screeners and upstream authors is
a big work overhead for us, or at least for me. The more we screen, the more
it means that I need to concentrate on the old software at the expense of the
new software, and become an human email proxy instead of a software packager.
I am somehow glad to provide this service from time to time, but I also think
that it is the duty of the people interested in mass-screens to innovate and
find ways to reach upstream directly. Of course, Debian can help with projects
such as the ‘new PTS‘ or http://upstream-metadata.debian.net/.
By the way, thanks to the release team for the very nice summary that started
this thread, for the auto-removals, and everything else.
Have a nice week-end,
--
Charles Plessy
Debian Med packaging team,
http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-med
Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan
Reply to: