Re: Debian/ppc64el feasiability to become an official architecture
On 25/07/14 01:14, peter green wrote:
> When you are added to testing you will be added as a "broken and fucked"
> (release team's terminology not mine) architecture. To get out of this state you
> will need to get and keep your port in a healthy state in testing. That will
> mean fixing (in some cases through NMUs) issues that are blocking migration of
> packages you need (whether or not those issues are related to your architecture)
> and fixing any architecture specific build failures as quickly as possible
> (since when you are in the "broken and fucked" state your builds will not be
> blockers for testing migration so a new upload that breaks your architecture
> will be able to migrate).
>
> Once your port reaches a healty state in testing (most packages present,
> virtually no packages outdated, very few architecture specific packages
> uninstallable), the release team will remove the "broken and fucked" status and
> you will become a release architecture. You then need to maintain your port in a
> healthy condition until release time.
I don't know how it has been done in the past, but it seems to me like it would
be easier to add any new architecture as a normal "first class" architecture.
Given that if we add a new architecture to testing is because it's already
keeping up and in a reasonable state, then it shouldn't block packages, so that
shouldn't be a problem. That sounds like less pain than adding it as a broken
architecture and having to unbreak it afterwards. But as I've said, I don't know
how it's been done in the past so maybe I'm missing something.
Emilio
Reply to: