Re: Architecture qualification meeting, scheduling
Adrian Bunk:
> [ fullquote adding -ports, for people not following -release or -devel ]
>
> [...]
>
> Is https://release.debian.org/stretch/arch_qualify.html the up-to-date
> information available to you, and the "candidate" line how a decision
> would look like based on the current information?
>
> cu
> Adrian
>
It reflects all the issues we are aware of at the present time (except
for archive-{coverage,uptodate}, which can be seen from
https://buildd.debian.org/stats/).
If you believe we have overlooked an issue or an update, please do not
hesitate to let us know. :)
Thanks,
~Niels
Re: Architecture qualification meeting, scheduling
[ fullquote adding -ports, for people not following -release or -devel ]
On Fri, Oct 07, 2016 at 06:35:07PM +0100, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am arranging the final architecture qualification meeting for Stretch.
> This is primarily of interest to the release team, but I will also take
> input from porters.
>
> As the schedule is currently wide open, please express your availability in
> the linked Doodle poll. There are 56 slots available, mostly in the European
> evening but a handful are daytime coinciding with the Cambridge
> mini-Debconf.
>
> Porters, please note your architecture in your response ("name (arch)").
>
> About the format of the meeting:
> Much like the Jessie meeting, it will be held via IRC in
> oftc.net/#debian-release and will be primarily a discussion amongst the
> release team. We will evaluate each port on the most up-to-date information
> available to us, and determine if it will be a release architecture for
> Stretch. We may ask for clarification from porters who are present if there
> are points at issue, but we ask that you are read-only otherwise.
>
> http://doodle.com/poll/362qvb89cvu43d4z
Is https://release.debian.org/stretch/arch_qualify.html the up-to-date
information available to you, and the "candidate" line how a decision
would look like based on the current information?
cu
Adrian
--
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed
Re: Re: Architecture qualification
On 6/1/12, Michael Banck mba...@debian.org wrote: Hi, On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 04:18:30PM +0200, Svante Signell wrote: On 28/05/12 01:52, Steven Chamberlain wrote: On 29/05/12 19:57, Andreas Barth wrote: [...] we add hurd-i386 to testing with break/fucked, but we don't expect it to make the release. I.e. bugs for hurd-i386 are not RC. Maybe that's all that's needed? The recent enthusiasm sounds to me like an opportunity. An official testing suite in the archive, from which usable installer images can be built, could be what encourages hurd-i386 to progress into something really releasable. If this doesn't happen now while there's some momentum, it might never happen again and that would be a shame. From the one of the porters side, this would be a _very_ good solution indeed! If GNU/Hurd enters som kind of testing status, the number of users and contributors will increase (hopefully). Can it be part of testing and then when the release happens, be treated specially? As I understand it, this has been discussed but deemed not possible/worthwhile. And most packages will be located in the main repo, only the packages having patches, not yet handled by the DMs, being there. Is that possible? What do you mean with there? Either there is a testing distribution, or there is not, as far as Debian is concerned. Michael -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-hurd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120601235418.gr10...@nighthawk.chemicalconnection.dyndns.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-hurd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/cae219abue+uz-54frdcoaclcog4pyu3b5oe9shi5z7drhqe...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Re: Architecture qualification
On Mon, 2012-06-04 at 10:56 +0100, Neil McGovern wrote: I assume this is not a regular mail correspondence, is it? I generally consider it polite to give people an opportunity to respond before assuming that you're being ignored, especially if it's part of a longer thread. Maybe three days is a little short for a mailing list correspondence. As per my previous mail, I will not be adding hurd to testing for this release. It would affect the release as a whole, and I'm not happy doing that. Ok, understood. So getting into testing after the release of Wheezy is a more resonable target. Just a small remark, two (three) of the four reasons for not adding Hurd to testing was shown false. D-I OK, ifupdown OK, SATA support in the works, the major obstacle seems to be the still too low package count. One issue is how to encourage more people trying Hurd out, when it is not in testing. It is very easy to install, e.g. in a VM, and there are a number of public Hurd boxen for DMs, DDs, upstream and everybody interested as well, http://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/public_hurd_boxen.html -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-hurd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1338805550.5450.192.ca...@hp.my.own.domain
Re: Architecture qualification
Hi, On Montag, 4. Juni 2012, Svante Signell wrote: One issue is how to encourage more people trying Hurd out, when it is not in testing. I honestly don't think that's the main blocker trying out hurd. Lack of SATA, and USB support are the blocker, I think. And probably also missing meaningful graphics output puts many people off. Having SATA (or whatever feature) in the works is also meaningless, as hurd is in the works for years. cheers, Holger -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-hurd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201206041323.08900.hol...@layer-acht.org
Re: Re: Architecture qualification
On Sat, Jun 02, 2012 at 12:22:14AM +0200, Svante Signell wrote: On Thu, 2012-05-31 at 16:18 +0200, Svante Signell wrote: From the one of the porters side, this would be a _very_ good solution indeed! If GNU/Hurd enters som kind of testing status, the number of users and contributors will increase (hopefully). Can it be part of testing and then when the release happens, be treated specially? And most packages will be located in the main repo, only the packages having patches, not yet handled by the DMs, being there. Is that possible? BTW: Are builds reported to buildd.debian.org already, it is visible ate least in the table on https://buildd.debian.org/, or maybe Samuel meant something else In my world it is considered polite to answer questions asked. Even if you don't have the time to reply properly, just say so. I'm still waiting for some kind of feedback, especially the questions. I assume this is not a regular mail correspondence, is it? I generally consider it polite to give people an opportunity to respond before assuming that you're being ignored, especially if it's part of a longer thread. As per my previous mail, I will not be adding hurd to testing for this release. It would affect the release as a whole, and I'm not happy doing that. Neil -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-hurd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120604095624.gu5...@camblue.cbg.collabora.co.uk
Re: Architecture qualification
On Mon, 2012-06-04 at 13:23 +0200, Holger Levsen wrote: Hi, On Montag, 4. Juni 2012, Svante Signell wrote: One issue is how to encourage more people trying Hurd out, when it is not in testing. I honestly don't think that's the main blocker trying out hurd. Lack of SATA, and USB support are the blocker, I think. Might be so, yes. And probably also missing meaningful graphics output puts many people off. Do you mean gnome3 and KDE4/5 here, or maybe DRM? Having SATA (or whatever feature) in the works is also meaningless, as hurd is in the works for years. No, this time the work is based on the DDE framework, recently successfully implemented for network drivers. Ask Samuel Thibault for more details if interested, he is the person in charge. BTW: USB support might also be possible within the DDE framework. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-hurd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1338816345.8802.500.ca...@s1499.it.kth.se
Re: Architecture qualification
On Montag, 4. Juni 2012, Svante Signell wrote: Do you mean gnome3 and KDE4/5 here, or maybe DRM? DRM No, this time the work is based on the DDE framework, recently successfully implemented for network drivers. Ask Samuel Thibault for more details if interested, he is the person in charge. BTW: USB support might also be possible within the DDE framework. show me the code in unstable aka sid, please... (or exp. is fine as well...) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-hurd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201206041537.15479.hol...@layer-acht.org
Re: Architecture qualification
On Mon, 4 Jun 2012 15:37:14 +0200 Holger Levsen hol...@layer-acht.org wrote: No, this time the work is based on the DDE framework, recently successfully implemented for network drivers. Ask Samuel Thibault for more details if interested, he is the person in charge. BTW: USB support might also be possible within the DDE framework. show me the code in unstable aka sid, please... (or exp. is fine as well...) DDE for network drivers has been in sid for a while now: http://packages.debian.org/sid/netdde http://packages.qa.debian.org/n/netdde.html SATA support isn't yet as far as I know, if that's what you were asking about. But as Svante said, that will use the same DDE framework. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-hurd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120605000709.71864...@vader.steven-mcdonald.id.au
Re: Re: Architecture qualification
On Thu, 2012-05-31 at 16:18 +0200, Svante Signell wrote: On 28/05/12 01:52, Steven Chamberlain wrote: On 29/05/12 19:57, Andreas Barth wrote: [...] we add hurd-i386 to testing with break/fucked, but we don't expect it to make the release. I.e. bugs for hurd-i386 are not RC. Maybe that's all that's needed? The recent enthusiasm sounds to me like an opportunity. An official testing suite in the archive, from which usable installer images can be built, could be what encourages hurd-i386 to progress into something really releasable. If this doesn't happen now while there's some momentum, it might never happen again and that would be a shame. From the one of the porters side, this would be a _very_ good solution indeed! If GNU/Hurd enters som kind of testing status, the number of users and contributors will increase (hopefully). Can it be part of testing and then when the release happens, be treated specially? And most packages will be located in the main repo, only the packages having patches, not yet handled by the DMs, being there. Is that possible? BTW: Are builds reported to buildd.debian.org already, it is visible ate least in the table on https://buildd.debian.org/, or maybe Samuel meant something else In my world it is considered polite to answer questions asked. Even if you don't have the time to reply properly, just say so. I'm still waiting for some kind of feedback, especially the questions. I assume this is not a regular mail correspondence, is it? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-hurd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1338589334.5450.165.ca...@hp.my.own.domain
Re: Re: Architecture qualification
Hi, On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 04:18:30PM +0200, Svante Signell wrote: On 28/05/12 01:52, Steven Chamberlain wrote: On 29/05/12 19:57, Andreas Barth wrote: [...] we add hurd-i386 to testing with break/fucked, but we don't expect it to make the release. I.e. bugs for hurd-i386 are not RC. Maybe that's all that's needed? The recent enthusiasm sounds to me like an opportunity. An official testing suite in the archive, from which usable installer images can be built, could be what encourages hurd-i386 to progress into something really releasable. If this doesn't happen now while there's some momentum, it might never happen again and that would be a shame. From the one of the porters side, this would be a _very_ good solution indeed! If GNU/Hurd enters som kind of testing status, the number of users and contributors will increase (hopefully). Can it be part of testing and then when the release happens, be treated specially? As I understand it, this has been discussed but deemed not possible/worthwhile. And most packages will be located in the main repo, only the packages having patches, not yet handled by the DMs, being there. Is that possible? What do you mean with there? Either there is a testing distribution, or there is not, as far as Debian is concerned. Michael -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-hurd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120601235418.gr10...@nighthawk.chemicalconnection.dyndns.org
Re: Re: Architecture qualification
On 28/05/12 01:52, Steven Chamberlain wrote: On 29/05/12 19:57, Andreas Barth wrote: [...] we add hurd-i386 to testing with break/fucked, but we don't expect it to make the release. I.e. bugs for hurd-i386 are not RC. Maybe that's all that's needed? The recent enthusiasm sounds to me like an opportunity. An official testing suite in the archive, from which usable installer images can be built, could be what encourages hurd-i386 to progress into something really releasable. If this doesn't happen now while there's some momentum, it might never happen again and that would be a shame. From the one of the porters side, this would be a _very_ good solution indeed! If GNU/Hurd enters som kind of testing status, the number of users and contributors will increase (hopefully). Can it be part of testing and then when the release happens, be treated specially? And most packages will be located in the main repo, only the packages having patches, not yet handled by the DMs, being there. Is that possible? BTW: Are builds reported to buildd.debian.org already, it is visible ate least in the table on https://buildd.debian.org/, or maybe Samuel meant something else. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-hurd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1338473910.8802.453.ca...@s1499.it.kth.se
Re: Architecture qualification
Joerg Jaspert, le Tue 29 May 2012 09:02:32 +0200, a écrit : There is only one thing I would agree on: If the RT decides to not include them in wheezy but add them to wheezy+1 right after wheezy is released (so we would be doing it during the process) and keep them there for the next release, then fine. Thats not exactly what we agreed on, but would be a workable compromise. I believe that'd be fine from the Hurd part. I personnally don't want to add work on people by hurrying hurd-i386 into wheezy. - hurd is no longer on the main mirrors. But only on those carrying debian-ports. I don't think it's a problem indeed. What is a problem is not appearing on buildd.debian.org. That makes maintainers way less receptive to patches or even fix their package themselves. Samuel -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-hurd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120530100121.gr3...@type.bordeaux.inria.fr
Re: Architecture qualification
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 12:01:21PM +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote: What is a problem is not appearing on buildd.debian.org. That makes maintainers way less receptive to patches or even fix their package themselves. I wonder how that makes a difference, even psychologically. We don't mail failed builds for hurd-i386 to maintainers for example. Kind regards Philipp Kern signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Architecture qualification
Philipp Kern, le Wed 30 May 2012 14:10:02 +0200, a écrit : On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 12:01:21PM +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote: What is a problem is not appearing on buildd.debian.org. That makes maintainers way less receptive to patches or even fix their package themselves. I wonder how that makes a difference, even psychologically. We *have* seen quite a few people notice the failure in their package's buildd.debian.org page and then fix it. It's both a matter of getting the array fully green, and being aware that there is a hurd-i386 port at all. Also, grub2 was again uploaded without applying the hurd patches we proposed, which are either already applied upstream, or trivial packaging changes... Not being in the buildd.debian.org reports will not help at all there. Samuel -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-hurd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120530122612.gh3...@type.bordeaux.inria.fr
Re: Architecture qualification
On 30/05/12 13:10, Philipp Kern wrote: I wonder how that makes a difference, even psychologically. We don't mail failed builds for hurd-i386 to maintainers for example. Actually, when looking into kfreebsd-* issues, I find it very helpful to see hurd-i386 on buildd.d.o, along with log excerpts of build failures and past build attempts. As it is the only other non-Linux arch, info from hurd-i386 buildds is often relevant. And if I submit a patch for something, I have a habit of checking back on those pages for 'all green' even though I'm not a maintainer. Without a hurd-i386 box to test on it may be the only source of feedback. Regards, -- Steven Chamberlain ste...@pyro.eu.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-hurd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4fc6585f.9030...@pyro.eu.org
Re: Architecture qualification
On 12861 March 1977, Steve McIntyre wrote: There's a related question, which I just realised wasn't actually explicit - does it make sense to add an architecture to testing at this stage of the process which we don't think is releasable? My memory of previous discussions is that the general answer was no, although this possibly depends on how one views the purpose of the testing suite. Definitely not, IMHO. How hard are the RT / ftpteam going to stick to the ship with Wheezy or you're out agreement as written in http://wiki.debian.org/Debian_GNU/Hurd ? Is Hurd at the point where we could *reasonably* ship it as (at least) a technology preview? I am pretty set on that. There isn't much point in coming to an agreement just to kick that out the door only because the time has come to actually do something about it. (And why didn't inclusion of hurd got a topic like, half a year or more ago?) There is only one thing I would agree on: If the RT decides to not include them in wheezy but add them to wheezy+1 right after wheezy is released (so we would be doing it during the process) and keep them there for the next release, then fine. Thats not exactly what we agreed on, but would be a workable compromise. I'm unconvinced that it is, being brutally honest. Ack. I also think it is way to late before the freeze to add something like a whole architecture (and hurd is more than just a plain architecture) *now*, where we already kick maintainers for uncoordinated package transitions, prepare to kick people putting (uncoordinated) SONAME changes into NEW and generally want to have a freeze RSN. Also, what is really changed when we do this? - hurd is no longer on the main mirrors. But only on those carrying debian-ports. * So what? Yay, we suddenly stop mirroring something to thousands of places which is used by less than anything else. Don't tell me there are so many users of hurd that it really warrants the wide spread mirroring. Especially with it being very limited on desktops and probably serious servers[fn:1] too? (Reading from http://wiki.debian.org/Debian_GNU/Hurd and links) - hurd can come back into the main archive following the usual archive qualification every other new addition has to follow. Clean, simple, straight forward. - We are rid of a special case of an unstable/experimental only architecture that often keeps pretty outdated packages in the archive. Less general maintenance work. Of course the above is my personal opinion and ftpmaster is a team. It might happen the rest disagrees with me and tells me to sod off, but I think thats highly unlikely, from what I know. Footnotes: [fn:1] That is, not just yeah, here, look, there is a server, but there is a server that actually has a production used application on it. Is HA and whatnot, and $company does $lotsathingswithit, relies on it -- bye, Joerg Ich will ein anderes Telefon, das hier klingelt immer! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-hurd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/8762bfcvw7@gkar.ganneff.de
Re: Architecture qualification
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 09:02:32 +0200, Joerg Jaspert wrote: - hurd can come back into the main archive following the usual archive qualification every other new addition has to follow. Clean, simple, straight forward. Not completely sure about the simple, straight forward part, if it needs a re-bootstrap. Cheers, Julien signature.asc Description: Digital signature
