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

Re: [Fwd: Re: hurd-i386 qualification for Wheezy]

On Thu, 2012-05-24 at 19:35 +0200, Svante Signell wrote:
> Looks like group reply in my mailer means reply only to the mailing list
> I have defined a filter for? Anyway, forwarding to debian-release too.

*checks headers*  You wanted "reply all", predictably enough.  Which
means this is now annoyingly unthreaded.  You also didn't copy -hurd on
your forward...

> On Thu, 2012-05-24 at 18:08 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> > > I'm not sure we've ever released with an architecture which was in
> > > either broken or fucked, but hopefully someone will correct me if I'm
> > > mistaken on that.
> > 
> > Anyone? :-)
> > 
> > Opinions as to whether it makes sense to release an architecture in 
> > either of those states would also be welcome.
> Is there a definition of what broken and fucked means, so this could be
> related to.

Well, the question was primarily aimed at members of the Release Team,
who know what the terms mean.  In short, an architecture is "broken" if
a source package may migrate even though doing so causes new
uninstallability on that architecture.  A fucked architecture is one on
which source packages may migrate even if the packages have not yet been
built on the architecture.

> Also, is "tech preview" defined somewhere. Were there any
> descriptions made/discussions when kFreeBSD was introduced for Squeeze?

Phil already addressed this.



Reply to: