[helix-maintainers] Back & Plan

[Wouter van Heyst]

On Wed, Aug 18, 2004 at 06:13:16PM +0200, Thomas Maurer wrote:
> > Then we agree to let Sarge release without Helix debs?
> 
> Yes :).
> 
> > > > I do think it's a good idea to provide sarge debs also. For Sid, it
> > > > shouldn't be too hard to find a sponsor if the deb is ok otherwise
> > > > (technically, policy, legal, the works).
> > > 
> > > Of course, sarge debs aren't a big problem (thanks to pbuilder). Do you
> > > know any active DD who can sponsor us? If so, please contact him and cc
> > > the list.
> > 
> > I'd prefer being totally sure myself that the package is perfect before
> > asking for a sponsor, there are several Helix friendly ones around, so I
> > don't see this as a problematic point. How do you see it?
> 
> You mean Helix friendly DDs, who can sponsor us?

Yes.

> After my last exams I will have a close look at the helix-player deb and
> "make it perfect". When we don't find anymore problems, we give it to
> the sponsor and wait for the first bugreports. Ok?

Nah, I'll go actively hunt for problems instead of waiting :) Ok.

<snip>

> > > I think you know ribosome and the build stuff better then I do (i.e. gcc
> > > options etc.). Do we need sperate configs for every arch? always
> > > different gcc options etc.? The most software use a standard config for
> > > the less spread archs. Thus we need one too, but don't really know how
> > > to do that :/.
> > 
> > Just need to try this :)
> 
> Ok, let me know what you can figure out :).

Aye.

Wouter