* Raphael Hertzog (hert...@debian.org) [110428 16:26]: > - reduce the set of architectures required for migration to testing to > i386/amd64/armel and have buildd of other architectures prioritize > missing builds in testing over missing builds in unstable > (freeze should be enough time even for slow arches to catch up and FTBFS > on already release architectures is still RC)
Most packages missing testing migration due to not built is because the package is *broken*. Not because the buildds are slow. I don't think it makes any sense to migrate an package to testing which is broken on some architectures. Unless you consider all other architectures to be second-class citicens. > - be less strict and keep old binaries (and thus 2 versions of the same > source package) in testing. This applies in particular for libraries > going through SONAME changes and which can happily coexist during a > transition. That was already discussed and approved for testing I think in Helsinki. However, it needs someone implementing code, and isn't as easy as it looks like. Feel free to submit patches though. > - allow/encourage usage of t-p-u to rebuild unstable packages that are > ready to transition except for the fact that they are entangled in a > transition that's already done. Andi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110429212843.gj15...@mails.so.argh.org