Am 02.09.2014 um 23:38 schrieb Reto Buerki: > On 09/02/2014 11:17 PM, Matthias Klose wrote: >> Am 02.09.2014 um 23:06 schrieb Reto Buerki: >>> But still, I'm conservative enabling new archs without rigorous testing. >>> Besides accessibility problems with some archs, this requires quite some >>> time (which I don't have atm). >>> >>> This is why I'm setting the severity of this bug to 'wishlist'. >> >> no, you are not conservative, but you are hiding issues. knowing which tests >> fail is far better than just not building. > > Hiding issues is not my intention. If a package is not available for an > *unsupported* architecture, there is no issue.
well, the issue is *that* there is no package for these architectures. > If enabling all architectures unconditionally has no negative effect on > how the package migrates to testing, I might consider it. there shouldn't any, if the package continues to build on all architectures. > As explained, > fixing failing architectures is not an option for now (especially for > architectures hardly anyone ever uses with Ada). not sure why it is a no-option. Fixing issues across architectures might improve quality of the library. > Where can I find more information about how failing architectures > influence the acceptance/migration of packages? ask your sponsor, or look at the dak documentation. Matthias -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
