On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 03:24:06PM +0100, Aurélien Jarno wrote: > Sven Luther a écrit : > >On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 02:38:01PM +0100, Aurélien Jarno wrote: > > > >>Sven Luther a écrit : > >> > >>>- Not having slower arches hold up testing. > >> > >>Slower arches don't hold up testing. Arches with buildd not well managed > >>do. > > > > > >Ok, drop this argument, but what do you think of the rest of the proposal > >? > I totally disagree with it. The current proposal (or even decision?), is > like cutting the leg when only one toe is affected.
Err, we are speaking of my proposal to build tier 2 arches from testing, not the one proposed by the vancouver meeting team. > What about partial mirroring to address space problems? What about a > team for wanna-build so that help and machines are not refused anymore? > What about a team for buildd so that there is always an admin available > at a given time? > > Maybe it doesn't work, but at least we have to try, before dropping > arches. Because it's clear that SCC arches will be dropped sooner or > later, if they are considered by debian-developers as "secondary arches". Ok, i agree with you. Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
