Re: Xemacs needs help
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: Re: Xemacs needs help
- From: Jérôme Marant <email@example.com>
- Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2004 09:05:33 +0100
- Message-id: <[🔎] firstname.lastname@example.org>
- In-reply-to: <email@example.com>
- References: <20040226180623.GA1919@twcny.rr.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <20040226210409.GB13782@fencepost> <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Quoting Brian Nelson <email@example.com>:
> > RC bugs prevent packages to enter testing.
> And that's an ugly kludge that should be used minimally and only
> temporarily (again IMO).
What kludge are you talking about? If a program is that buggy,
there are many chances to see RC bugs are filed against it.
If it is not buggy, then it is suitable for testing.
> > And as long as experimental is not autobuilt, there is not other
> > way to get such a package built on other architecures.
> Of course you can, but not in an automated way. Why isn't experimental
> autobuilt anyway?
This is not in ftp-masters' plan.