On Fri, Nov 30, 2007 at 12:23:34AM +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote: > On 29/11/2007, Michael Banck wrote: > > I believe "buildd redundancy" does not mean having 2+ active buildds, > > but having at least one active buildd who can keep up, plus a possibly > > inactive backup buildd who could quickly be made active in case the > > primary buildd fails. > > I'd add ???having a responsive buildd maintainer???, uploading packages in a > timely fashion.
Awww, just when we were able to keep it constructive for a couple of messages... Michael -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
