On Mon, Apr 11, 2005 at 11:40:56AM +0200, Bernd Eckenfels wrote: > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote: > > What's stopping the freeze is all the people uploading their low-priority > > packages and keeping the arm autobuilders from ever catching up on the ones > > that are actually medium and high priority.
> Why is that? Last explanation we seen here was, that high prio (and some > other strange criterias) can starve low prio packages. No it is no longer > the case? Sorry, I said "low-priority packages" when I meant "low-priority fixes". The starvation happens because queue ordering is based strictly on package priority, and no consideration is given to the urgency of uploads. > If we need a freeze, why dont you just make one? What we need is for arm to make headway against the Needs-Build queue (which is starting to happen) and for testing-security to be operational (which is starting to happen). Freezing would be so completely beside the point if the infrastructure isn't in place to let us release; and freezing while arm is lagging behind would just make the release team's job of sorting out RC bugfixes that are missing from testing that much harder. -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
