On Mon, Aug 22, 2005 at 06:59:52AM -0500, John Hasler wrote: > Andreas Jochens writes: > Wouter Verhelst wrote: > > - must have successfully compiled 98% of the archive's source (excluding > > arch-specific packages)
> Andreas Jochens writes: > > It is not possible to build 98% of the unmodified source packages from > > the 'unstable' distribution. This is true for any port including i386. > Make it 98% of the packages buildable on the accepted port with the highest > build percentage. > How was 98% arrived at? It's an arbitrary line, but then, any such line would have to be drawn at an arbitrary point. Requiring 100% is unrealistic, because it would give porters a perverse incentive to argue for per-architecture exclusion of packages; relaxing the percentage to a lower number gives us the situation we had in sarge, where too much time was spent waiting on one architecture or another for updates to testing. I certainly think that the metric needs to take into account Packages-arch-specific. None of the statistics we have available today are quite right; I think they're all either "percent built of all packages this arch has ever built", which doesn't account for archs not keeping up with new packages, or "percent built of all packages we have source for", which penalizes ports unnecessarily for the upload of non-portable sources. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature