Re: getting lully back on-line [Was, Re: I'll be a son of a bitch.]
* Martin Michlmayr - Debian Project Leader (leader@debian.org) [050414 13:45]:
> * Andreas Barth <aba@not.so.argh.org> [2005-04-14 13:25]:
> > > BTW, Noah Meyerhans at MIT offered two Alphas but so far he hasn't
> > > been taken up on his offer.
> >
> > As far as I know we're not short on offers. Alexander Wirt also offered
> > an Alpha.
> Yes, and these offers are the reason I haven't suggested spending
> money on lully so far; but if people think fixing lully makes more
> sense, I'm more than willing to spend money on it.
Frankly speaking, I don't mind whether we take a new machine up, or fix
lully. But I think it's not ok to have a machine marked as "down - root
fs drive died, no response from local admin" for quite a long time
(actually, the "no response" should not happen at all), _and_ having
only one alpha buildd (and as escher is also down, no developers
machine). Whichever way we take out from it, is IMHO a common decision
by the porters, debian-admin, ... But I'm really worried that this
issues remains open for so long.
Cheers,
Andi
--
http://home.arcor.de/andreas-barth/
PGP 1024/89FB5CE5 DC F1 85 6D A6 45 9C 0F 3B BE F1 D0 C5 D1 D9 0C
Reply to: