On Tuesday 06 December 2005 13:15, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > Matthias Julius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Hamish Moffatt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> It's deemed necessary to split the archive into popular/less-popular > >> architectures before any more can be added -- not just amd64. The > >> current single archive is too big for mirrors. That work is in progress. > > > > I don't understand the problem there. Each mirror already can decide > > which architectures to mirror. > > > > Matthias > > The first argument is: All primary mirrors must have all archs. > > The second: Excluding archs is to hard for mirror admins, they will > drop debian complety instead of excluding archs. > > > Both arguments I can't agree with and some primary mirrors already > droped archs. But that were the reasons given. > > MfG > Goswin
I can see real benefits in the idea of supporting many architectures, but of course this means more to look after. Problems with a package on one architecture can hold up its release in other architectures. It's all rather like cooking a big meal: the more items you have on the stove, the harder it gets to time everything so it all comes ready at once. I believe there is a place for a distribution which supports just the most popular architectures -- 80686, AMD64 and PowerPC perhaps -- with regular releases; alongside a distribution which supports the "minority" architectures and is more meticulously checked to be sure it runs well on on all of them, even to the extent of holding up a release while issues are settled. Except that the first I described sounds an awful lot like Ubuntu ..... -- AJS -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
