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

PROPOSAL: Communication to solve the dispute. (was: -= PROPOSAL =- Release sarge with amd64)

I propose an amendment to this GR proposal. The text is completely replaced

The Debian project hereby resolves:

  - That the developers in charge for adding the architecture identified by
    dpkg as "amd64", hereinafter "amd64", to the "unstable" archive, should
    explain publicly (via debian-devel-announce@lists.debian.org) the problems
    which delay this action.

  - That the developers working on the "amd64" port should be invited to
    friendly cooperate in solving all of these problems.

  - That failure to accomplish the above rules implies any existant problems
    shall be ignored and hence "amd64" added to the "unstable" archive without
    further delay.

  - That success in accomplishing the above rules has no implication with
    regard to inclussion of the "amd64" architecture in a stable release.


  - Taking technical decisions through voting is not generaly a good idea.
  - We're facing a communication problem, so the solution is to ease
    communication between the affected parties.
  - Deciding wether the port is ready for sarge is beyond the scope of this

On Tue, Jul 13, 2004 at 02:43:59PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> The Debian project,
> based on its Social Contract stating that its priorities are its users 
> and free software,
> recognizing that the AMD64-based architectures are likely to become the
> most widespread on personal computers and workstations in a near future,
> and acknowledging that its users want to take advantage of all this
> architecture's features,
> hereby resolves:
> 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/ ;
> 2. that non-compliance of that "amd64" distribution with the Linux 
>    Standard Base specification for IA32 will not be considered a 
>    release-critical bug;
> 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.
> Rationale:
> With our current release timeframe, AMD64 is likely to become the most 
> sold architecture for personal computers way before the release that 
> will follow sarge. If we don't release sarge with AMD64 support, our 
> users will be very disappointed. The popularity of the debian-amd64 
> project just shows what they are waiting for.
> Furthermore, the AMD64 architecture is mostly ready. It now builds just 
> as many packages as our other release architectures, and it has a 
> working installer.
> The only valid reasons for not including it are lack of LSB compliance
> (which can still be easily achieved with a i386 chroot) and mirror space
> (which will be saved using partial mirroring). Another reason seems to
> be the lack of cooperation of some developers. This resolution intends
> to make everyone cooperate in this direction. Of course, the author of
> this resolution would welcome if the people responsible would just do
> it, thereby making this resolution superfluous.
> I'm looking for seconds for this proposal, and I hope this can be 
> discussed quickly so that it doesn't delay the release for too long.
> -- 
>  .''`.           Josselin Mouette        /\./\
> : :' :           josselin.mouette@ens-lyon.org
> `. `'                        joss@debian.org
>   `-  Debian GNU/Linux -- The power of freedom

Robert Millan

(Debra and Ian) (Gnu's Not (UNiplexed Information and Computing System))/\
(kernel of *(Berkeley Software Distribution))

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: