[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: New Package Process

On Wed, 27 Apr 2005, Ralf Ertzinger wrote:

> On Wed, Apr 27, 2005 at 10:09:01AM -0400, Greg DeKoenigsberg wrote:
> Just a litte comment: debian has been trying to do this, and has come
> to a screeching halt by now, failing to release a new stable version
> for almost three years now, and steadily trying to replace Duke Nukem
> Forever as the All-Time-Vaporware champion.
> This may not be a problem now, but will be later, especially if
> a) more architectures are added to FC
> b) failing to build on one arch is a blocker

"Failing to build on one arch = blocker": If we're going to commit to this
policy, we need to ensure that every developer has access to every arch.  
(This will take some time, but we know it to be true.)  Perhaps a policy
will evolve in which we have more- and less-blessed arches; I certainly
don't ever want to be in a position in which we have 200 important
packages blocking because they can't build on IBM Z-Series boxes.
> And all other things that may be said about debian nonwithstanding,
> they do have procedures for everything.

Yep.  Which is good and bad.  We need more policy.  But not too much.  :)


_____________________  ____________________________________________
  Greg DeKoenigsberg ] [ the future masters of technology will have
 Community Relations ] [ to be lighthearted and intelligent.  the
             Red Hat ] [ machine easily masters the grim and the 
                     ] [ dumb.  --mcluhan
      Red Hat Summit ] [
         New Orleans ] [ Learn. Network. Experience Open Source.
     June 1/2/3 2005 ] [ (And Make Your Boss Pay For It.) 
                       [ http://www.redhat.com/promo/summit/

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]