Re: Re: Architecture qualification
On Thu, 2012-05-31 at 16:18 +0200, Svante Signell wrote:
> On 28/05/12 01:52, Steven Chamberlain wrote:
> > On 29/05/12 19:57, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > > [...] we add hurd-i386 to testing with
> > > break/fucked, but we don't expect it to make the release. I.e. bugs
> > > for hurd-i386 are not RC.
> >
> > Maybe that's all that's needed?
> >
> > The recent enthusiasm sounds to me like an opportunity. An official
> > testing suite in the archive, from which usable installer images can be
> > built, could be what encourages hurd-i386 to progress into something
> > really releasable. If this doesn't happen now while there's some
> > momentum, it might never happen again and that would be a shame.
>
> From the one of the porters side, this would be a _very_ good solution
> indeed! If GNU/Hurd enters som kind of testing status, the number of
> users and contributors will increase (hopefully). Can it be part of
> testing and then when the release happens, be treated specially? And
> most packages will be located in the main repo, only the packages having
> patches, not yet handled by the DMs, being there. Is that possible?
>
> BTW: Are builds reported to buildd.debian.org already, it is
> visible ate least in the table on https://buildd.debian.org/, or maybe
> Samuel meant something else
In my world it is considered polite to answer questions asked. Even if
you don't have the time to reply properly, just say so. I'm still
waiting for some kind of feedback, especially the questions.
I assume this is not a regular mail correspondence, is it?
Reply to: