Niels Thykier writes ("Bits from the Release Team (Jessie freeze info)"):
> Results of porter roll-call
> ===========================
...
> Summary table:
> Arch || DDs || NMs/DMs || Other || Total
> - ---------------++-----++---------++-------++------
> armel || 5 || 0 || 2 || 7
> armhf || 6 || 1 || 2 || 9
> hurd-i386 || 5 || 0 || 3 || 8
> ia64 || *0* || 0 || 3 || 3
> kfreebsd-amd64 || 5 || 0 || 2 || 6
> kfreebsd-i386 || 5 || 0 || 2 || 6
> mips || 2 || 0 || 1 || 3
> mipsel || 2 || 0 || 1 || 3
> powerpc[1] || (1) || 0 || 2 || 2.5?
> s390x || 1 || 0 || 1 || 2
> sparc || 1 || 0 || 0 || 1
...
> Based on the number of porters, we are considering changing the
> current requirements of "5 DDs" to better reflect the reality of the
> situation. We will follow up in a future bits on the changes.
Thanks.
I think it is disappointing to find that we may be dropping
architectures where a significant amount of effort is available,
simply because the volunteers don't have enough status - specifically,
because of a lack of DDs.
I'm keen that Debian should continue to support a wide range of
architectures. Would it help if I, as a DD, volunteered to sponsor
porter uploads for any architecture ? That is I guess I'm
volunteering to become a new kind of person - a "non-port-specific
porter sponsor".
Obviously I will review the debdiff etc. I'm an experienced C
programmer with some background in C language lawyering and
portability stuff, so I should usually be able to do a decent review
of a patch even on an unfamiliar architecture.
In fact, regardless of what the release team decide for the policy, I
would be happy to sponsor porter uploads. Please just email me.
Ian.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-arm-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
http://lists.debian.org/21103.52917.876297.985...@chiark.greenend.org.uk
