[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Gnome 2.4



Le ven 08/08/2003 à 12:15, Sven Luther a écrit :
> On Fri, Aug 08, 2003 at 08:32:42AM +0200, Jérôme Warnier wrote:
> > [...]
> > 
> > > In truth, we would need a group of smaller experimental repositories,
> > > with autobuilders attached too.
> > Could there be one for backports to Woody as someone proponed a few days
> > ago?
> 
> What you need official woody backports, and that is something i think
> would be good to have, but i am not the one to decide about that, and i
> am not sure our current infrastructure can handle it. It is ready for
> it, but if you consider the considerable amount of network space and bandwith
> as well as the load on the autobuilders, i am not sure it would be
> realsitically doable.
Well, I was not thinking really about an official buildd, but a machine
where to compile automatically for a small team to work on it together.
I'm not, in any way, willing to delay or slow down the Sarge release.
The opposite, in fact, if I can do anything to get the patches or
solutions I found to backport to Woody available to Sarge, I would be
really glad.

Maybe some buildd guru could help me setup such a system? I have already
a machine that could be used to this (with plenty of disk space and
horsepower), but I have to be carefull because it's already a production
machine. I would like at least to talk to someone knowledgeable in this
respect before doing it actually.

> Also, such a project would be better discussed in a post sarge release
> timeframe, in order not to delay the sarge release further than is
> necessary.
Then I would have to do it for Sarge, not Woody. But who knows when
Sarge will be out? I need a cool desktop right now, not somewhere end of
this year (or is it next year ;-)).

> Friendly,
> 
> Sven Luther
-- 
Jérôme Warnier <jwarnier@beeznest.net>
BeezNest s.à r.l.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message =?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?=


Reply to: