Re: HAMM FREEZE IS ONE WEEK AWAY
Christian Leutloff wrote:
> Hi,
>
> wouldn't it be helpful for the non-i386 architecture to make the
> release of Debian 2.0 with an individual release *date*. I suggest to
> concentrate the release date to the issues of the i386 part of our
> distribution and let the other architecture try individually to make
> their own release. It would be useful to all our ports to have a
> working 2.0 release even if there are three additional month needed to
> make it ready. With nearly no changes in the source code base it would
> be much easier to catch up with the i386 binaries.
I second that. Moreover, some packages are still buggy, like glibc pre2.1,
used on sparc at least. New uploads should not be forbidden for such packages,
because the only way to fix bugs (most of the time) is to upload a new snapshot
release. It comes to mind other packages, like binutils 2.8.1.0.** (a new
2.8.1.0.23 was just uploaded for sparc) and libstdc++ (std I/Os broken).
Regards.
--
Eric Delaunay | "La guerre justifie l'existence des militaires.
delaunay@lix.polytechnique.fr | En les supprimant." Henri Jeanson (1900-1970)
--
E-mail the word "unsubscribe" to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST. Trouble? E-mail to listmaster@debian.org .
Reply to: