On Mon, Aug 22, 2005 at 12:22:47AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > There was discussion in Vancouver about requiring ports to have an > "upstream" kernel maintainer, FSO "upstream"; perhaps we should be > considering requiring there to be a glibc/gcc/binutils upstream for each > port, so that we don't get the first sign of these bugs when the > packages hit unstable.
What sort of q&a would upstream be doing that would help us out here? Can the port teams do this kind of work themselves prior to packages hitting unstable? - David Nusinow -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
