Simon Stelling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Mon, 04 Sep 2006 13:00:24 +0200:
> Duncan wrote: >> In terms of falling behind x86, how are we actually doing compared to them >> since they actually got an arch team and arch testers, and made it policy >> that maintainers didn't keyword for x86 unless they got permission from x86 >> to do their own packages? > > Comparing the two stable "trees" we're rougly 120 packages behind them, > right atm. Is there any way to tell (without going to extremes given it's not /that/ important) how much of that lead might be "legacy", that is, from when they were doing things the old way? IOW, if 240 of their stable packages haven't had a stable bump since they actually got an arch-team, we're actually ahead by 120, in terms of what has actually gone thru normal arch keyword testing. =8^) OTOH, if there's only 60 in their "legacy stable" group, we're still behind by 60. =8^( -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman -- [email protected] mailing list
