Hi,
The final results are in:
Summary table:
Arch || DDs || NMs/DMs || Other || Total
---------------++-----++---------++-------++------
armel || 3 || 0 || 1 || 4
armhf || 3 || 1 || 2 || 6
hurd-i386 || 5 || 0 || 3 || 8
ia64 || *0* || 0 || 3 || 3
kfreebsd-amd64 || 4 || 0 || 2 || 6
kfreebsd-i386 || 4 || 0 || 2 || 6
mips || 1 || 0 || 1 || 2
mipsel || 1 || 0 || 1 || 2
powerpc[1] || (1) || 0 || 2 || 2.5?
s390x || *0* || 0 || 0 || *0*
sparc[2] || 1 || 0 || 0 || 1
[1] The (1) and .5 is from a "I am not primarily a porter [...]"-remark,
so I wasn't sure how to count it.
[2] By the looks of it, if sparc was replaced by sparc64, we could be
looking at 3 in the "Other"-column rather than 0.
NMs/DMs include DMs and people currently in NM process. The "Other"
column may include people who said they would like to become porters
(but would need to be introduced to the job) and thus may imply some
active recruiting from the current porters. This is at least true for
hurd-i386.
The current policy says that we require "5 developers" (i.e. DDs) for
release architectures[AP], so based on that only amd64, i386 and
hurd-i386 would pass this requirement. It is quite possible we need to
revise that requirement, but most of the architectures would (still) do
well to attract a few more (DD) porters.
I have attached a file with my notes of who are behind those numbers.
If your name is missing or you believe I have miscounted something[CD]
for an architecture listed in the table above, please reply to this
email *promptly* (CC'ing me explicitly is fine) with your concerns or
corrections.
At this time, I have *not* updated the arch qualification table yet. I
will do that in a couple of days. We will also follow up on this in the
next bits from the release team.
~Niels
[AP] http://release.debian.org/jessie/arch_policy.html
[CD] I may (or may not) have been caffeine-deprived when I did the
counting. You are free to make assumptions about whether that has
affected my ability to do addic^Htion or parsing your email(s) properly.