Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> writes:
> On Sat, May 15, 2004 at 06:31:25PM +0200, Sebastien Bacher wrote:
>> * Architectures:
>> A full Gnome2.6 is built and available in experimental for these archs:
>> - i386
>> - ppc
>> - mips
>> - arm
>> - ia64
> You're still missing alpha, hppa, sparc, mipsel, s390 and m68k...
You know that this is nearly impossible. To build the complete GNOME
2.6.{0,1}, you need root access to a chroot, as you have to install most
packages after you've built them 'cause they're in the build-deps of
other packages.
BTW: Packages for SPARC are available at http://people.debian.org/~phython/.
>> So what the release team thinks about this ? If you are fine with that
>> we can start the migration today.
> You don't have a majority of architectures build in experimental yet,
> let alone all of them, or even almost all of them. You still need to
> work on that.
>
> You should be aiming to get everything uploaded to experimental ready to
> reupload to unstable with no code changes (ie, just bump the version in
> the changelog, change experimental to unstable, build and upload). If
> you've got apps that need to transition at the same time -- Gnome apps
> using DEPRECATED features, or KDE libs or whatever -- get those uploaded
> into experimental too.
I'd like to hear some more reasons for this sort of roadmap. ATM, we
can't release sarge anyway (as you've announced yourself). GNOME 2.4 is
stable and isn't developed upstream anymore, so we even don't need to
update the packages in testing. Where is the problem in actually doing
stuff in unstable? Since when is unstable not supposed to break?
Marc
--
$_=')(hBCdzVnS})3..0}_$;//::niam/s~=)]3[))_$(rellac(=_$({pam(esrever })e$.)4/3*
)e$(htgnel+23(rhc,"u"(kcapnu ,""nioj ;|_- |/+9-0z-aZ-A|rt~=e$;_$=e${pam tnirp{y
V2ajFGabus} yV2ajFGa&{gwmclBHIbus}gwmclBHI&{yVGa09mbbus}yVGa09mb&{hBCdzVnSbus';
s/\n//g;s/bus/\nbus/g;eval scalar reverse # <mailto:marc@marcbrockschmidt.de>
Attachment:
pgp6qiuotZgHI.pgp
Description: PGP signature