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

Re: Architecture qualification



On 15/05/12 21:58, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
On Tue, 2012-05-15 at 21:51 +0200, Mehdi Dogguy wrote:
On 15/05/12 21:41, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
On Tue, 2012-05-15 at 21:22 +0200, Mehdi Dogguy wrote:
On 15/05/12 17:18, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
http://release.debian.org/wheezy/arch_qualify.html

Should we add a row labeled "auto-signing" there?

auto-signing makes things less a PITA and make transitions run
 (a bit) faster. It'd be very nice if we could require
auto-signing for release architectures. It has been done for
security already.

Well, given how close we (hopefully) are to the freeze, we'd
mostly be talking about supporting the architecture in stable,
where transitions are obviously not an issue.

It helps to prepare the release though. and I was told it was
appreciated when point releases are in preparation ;)

The bit you didn't quote also pointed out that it's not something
the porters can generally do anything about, so isn't really relevant
for the purposes of a mail sent _to porters_, which is what the
current thread was primarily about.


FWIW, I wasn't proposing to ask porters about that, but just discuss the
idea as it has already been mentioned several times. Maybe I should have
started another thread. Thanks for your answers!

--
Mehdi Dogguy مهدي الدڤي
http://dogguy.org/


Reply to: