* Margarita Manterola (margamanter...@gmail.com) [100318 21:03]:
> I would like to support as many architectures as possible. We cannot
> deny the passage of time, however, and so we must accept that some
> architectures are bound to stop being supported. This even happened
> some years ago with
* Yavor Doganov (ya...@gnu.org) [100317 14:55]:
> - mips/mipsel are probably the most hated archs by DDs in the past few
> months :-), and there's no ironclad way to secure their future too.
First of all, the needs-build queue is almost empty on mipsel (and was
on mips till we lost the hard disk
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 10:49 AM, Yavor Doganov wrote:
> Debian has been known through the years for its excellent support for
> many architectures. In theory, a released arch should be as stable as
> the common/popular archs. (In practice, it is/was pretty close, which
> is good enough.)
Yes,
В Thu, 18 Mar 2010 00:02:56 +0900, Charles Plessy написа:
> Le Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 03:49:16PM +0200, Yavor Doganov a écrit :
>> * There should be an entitiy within the project to decide which arch
>> gets released and which not
> I do not completely agree with this:
>
> I think that the porters
Hi Yavor!
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 03:49:16PM +0200, Yavor Doganov wrote:
> This asset is not something to be proud of because of shallow
> marketing reasons -- it benefits the whole Free World as many bugs are
> uncovered, reported, and fixed, quite often by Debian people. It
> would not be incor
On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 12:02:56AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> By the way, I would like to react to one of Wouter's comment, that package
> maintainers should fix the porting bugs themselves.
I didn't mean to imply that, and if it came across as such, I would like
to apologise.
What I meant to
Le Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 03:49:16PM +0200, Yavor Doganov a écrit :
>
> * There should be an entitiy within the project to decide which arch
> gets released and which not, which one is blocking the whole release
> process and ought to be ignored for testing propagation, etc.
> Naturally, such
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 03:49:16PM +0200, Yavor Doganov wrote:
> Debian has been known through the years for its excellent support for
> many architectures. In theory, a released arch should be as stable as
> the common/popular archs. (In practice, it is/was pretty close, which
> is good enough.)
Debian has been known through the years for its excellent support for
many architectures. In theory, a released arch should be as stable as
the common/popular archs. (In practice, it is/was pretty close, which
is good enough.)
This asset is not something to be proud of because of shallow
market
9 matches
Mail list logo
