On Fri, 6 Aug 2010, kamaraju kusumanchi wrote:
> > Removing the package from unstable doesn't prevent you from working on
> > the package. It's just a way to clean up Debian. It will be very easy to
> > re-upload when you will have something that builds in i386 and amd64
> > (though it might be better to upload to experimental, as I doubt that
> > you will have something in a releasable state before a few months).
>
> I agree. Actually removing the package might do some good in this
> case. We can concentrate on just i386 and amd64 and worry about other
> architectures later on. This might actually speed up things a bit.
I spent basically no time on non-x86 architectures; and as it turned out,
the package built successfully on most of them anyway. Ignoring
everything except x86 is probably the right approach.
> > As for the strategy of working on the 3.X release or on the 4.X release,
> > I don't think that we should try to release something which is not
> > closer to the latest upstream release than 3.0.5.
>
> Yes. The software released in Debian should be close to the latest 4.X
> release. I am thinking of having the intermediate versions somewhere
> in a private repository.
I certainly made extensive use of private repositories when developing
the 3.0.5 package.
-Tim Abbott
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
