Peter 'p2' De Schrijver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This is unacceptable. It would for example allow archs to be refused > because their names starts with an 'A'.
Personally, I'd prefer to delegate that sort of decision to the technical committee rather than have the release team have a veto. Even so, if a group of people produce a port of Debian that'll only ever be used by 50 or so people, then that really doesn't justify the amount of effort taken to support a release. There are other reasons why it might be worth failing to release an architecture even if it does reach the defined criteria. > Yes. See above. Most problems can be solved by other means then just > throwing out lots of people's work. Some are actually not a problem but > are probably invented to articifially limit the amount of archs. So write a concrete proposal that solves the problems you believe need solving, and then see what people think. It's fairly clear that we're not going to have consensus on this issue before Sarge is released, so there's no great rush about it. People are far too busy picking on small details of proposals they don't like instead of coming up with a decent and comprehensive set of solutions. If you don't like what's been proposed, produce something better. For the most part, that's how Debian works. -- Matthew Garrett | [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
