tl;dr - I plan to file stabilization bugs without CC-ing arches first so that maintainers have chance to comment anyway. That'd still generate large amount of bugs, and I was mostly asking about that.
On 11/21/11 1:14 PM, Andreas K. Huettel wrote: > Are the cited advances relevant for all stable arches, for the "major > ones", or only for one of them? My script has checked for x86 and amd64, but I could easily adapt it to check for more. > I would like to avoid the situation that we all file stable requests > like mad and end up with all-but-one swamped arch teams and a > neverending list of open stabilization bugs waiting for the last > arch. Right. My plan for now was to only CC x86 and amd64. I'm afraid other archs wouldn't cope with the load and would be just very annoyed about doing stabilizations for minor or revision bumps. Note that I've only started thinking about this after my batch-stabilization workflow proved to be effective. I think we can deal with more stabilization bugs now, and that wouldn't be the case a few months ago (we also have more ATs now).
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
