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

splitting debian-devel-changes



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Well, now that the Debian ports generate a lot of postings in
debian-devel-changes, I think it is time to split that list by
architecture.

Two proposals:

1. "The easy one": Use debian-devel-changes for source packages, i386
packages, and binary-all packages, as now. Use debian-devel-changes-m68k
for m68k-only binary packages, debian-devel-changes-powerpc for
powerpc-only binary packages, etc.

Pros: An ordinary i386 user will not receive postings about m68k, alpha, 
powerpc or sparc binaries.

Cons: People who compile for m68k, powerpc, alpha, sparc, etc. would have
sometimes to post the .changes file both to debian-devel-changes and
debian-devel-changes-{whatever} when they are the real package
maintainer (i.e. when they maintain the source package).

2. The "granular one":

debian-devel-changes-source
debian-devel-changes-all
debian-devel-changes-i386
debian-devel-changes-m68k
debian-devel-changes-powerpc
[...]

Well, I don't think we need to change it so much, so if proposal 1.
is good enough for the people doing the ports, that would be fine.
I would like to hear opinions from them.

Thanks.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3ia
Charset: latin1

iQCVAgUBNLPS7SqK7IlOjMLFAQGv0wQAogh9VohCxOqr9DoNb6Yd5xuYQ6Sl43/0
xRnDy+MQdCemldbb4JwfsntLPgMJoau944zHw/fOpuOvoJb+g1H1M+VBb7J61T+1
o33bBdHPysAjeT6D9MGtH+jVx0UMWMYq/dHJmNPF5DbL9I5TF76+bpinFIkmTDOo
BevSTdLWB6Y=
=7MmS
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


Reply to: