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

Re: -= PROPOSAL =- Release sarge with amd64



Frank Pennycook wrote:
> Surely it is not so much a technical issue as a policy issue? Since
> different opinions are being expressed, then in a democracy it would
> seem valid to decide it by voting.

We don't vote to decide Debian policy, where different opinions are
expressed regularly, we don't vote on which bugs of a package should be
fixed first, be that package debhelper or ftp.debian.org, and we
shouldn't vote on technical matters here either. 

| 1. that the next Debian GNU/Linux release, codenamed "sarge", will
|    include the "amd64" architecture, based on the work currently hosted
|    at http://debian-amd64.alioth.debian.org/ ;

This is a technical decision; that the amd64 port is ready, necessary,
more important that other pending ports, and that that particular
implementation of it is the one we want in Debian. It's also a decision
about what will constitute sarge, which is, again, a technical decision,
much as was the decision about which installer to use with sarge.

| 2. that non-compliance of that "amd64" distribution with the Linux
|    Standard Base specification for IA32 will not be considered a
|    release-critical bug;

This is also a technical decision, just as if we'd decided that amd64 port
would not need to use FHS directory locations, or that its shell would
not be a POSIX shell.

| 3. that we will include it immediately in the "sid" distribution and
|    auto-building infrastructure, and take all appropriate steps so
|    that inclusion won't delay the release of "sarge" any further.

And those steps would indeed require various technical changes to the
mirroring system, and probably much else.

> I can understand that these questions are controversial. I don't quite
> understand why the suggestion to vote on it is controversial.

Go back and take a look at every GR this project has ever voted on, from
the logo on, and the quality of the results, vs. decisions made by other
means. Voting does not have a good history in this project of getting
things done, or even of reaching a decision that most developers are
happy with by the first vote.

-- 
see shy jo

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: