John Goerzen wrote: [snip] > > - the release architecture must have N+1 buildds where N is the number > > required to keep up with the volume of uploaded packages > > > > - the value of N above must not be > 2 > > It seems to me that if an arch can keep up with builds, why impose this > artificial restriction?
I guess in order to have an assured minimum build time for critical packages like security updates. > > is freed up by moving the other architectures to scc.debian.org). > > This will drastically reduce the architecture coordination required in > > testing, giving us a more limber release process and (it is hoped) a > > much shorter release cycle on the order of 12-18 months. > > That is a Good Thing. However, why eliminate out of hand the > possibility of ever making stable releases for the other 7 archs? Even > if they release later than those 4? I doubt out-of-sync releases are manageable, it would increase the number of source packages (where a per-arch split of the archive is inefficient), and the out-of-sync arch would lose the advantage of the overall stabilization effort. Thiemo -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
