Hi, On Sat, 21 Oct 2006, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 18, 2006 at 06:11:38PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > Assumed m68k would be able to kill (most of) the backlog in time, what would > > prevent m68k from becoming releasable? > > - It didn't sustain the `95%' rate during the last x months? > > x=3, yes. > > The sustainability issue is important, because it's the best evidence we can > get that the arch will be supportable for ongoing security updates. Is it really the _best_ evidence? It only measures how quickly a port can provide security updates, but it doesn't say very much about the quality of them. bye, Roman -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
