On 12/02/14 20:06, Niels Thykier wrote: > kFreeBSD is just shy of 90%, whereas most other release architectures > are at 96%[1]. Here kFreeBSD has increased in the past quarter from > ~89.5% to "almost, but not quite 90%".
I'm a little puzzled you mention this as a problem because... > Here we need you to assess what can you reasonably support. Once we > know that we can look at the consequences and how to deal with them. if we decide some packages can't be supported any more, I assume some would become linux-any and thus the number of built packages would fall? So these seem like conflicting goals. I fully agree with the latter point though, I see value in having a plan for what to support, and probably free some packages of an obligation to either build, be installable or functional kfreebsd if it no longer makes sense. Regards, -- Steven Chamberlain ste...@pyro.eu.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/52fd53f5.2090...@pyro.eu.org
