[Pkg-ltsp-devel] supported architectures

[vagrant at freegeek.org]

so, i'd like to get feedback regarding some of the less common
architectures regarding ltsp related source packages (ltsp, ldm,
ltspfs). particularly what processes we need to go through if we do
restrict it to a limited set of architectures.

one problem is that slow buildd's on some architectures (likely to never
really use ltsp) have frequently held back sid -> lenny migration,
sometimes for as long as 2-3 months. 
right now, the blocking architecture is hppa, but mips*, sparc, alpha
and powerpc have sometimes also had problems for extended periods of
time.

some of the problem seems to be that both ltsp and ldm are priority
extra, which seems to get the lowest priority for uploads. reading the
description in debian policy for priority suggests to me that priority
extra is really appropriate for ldm, ltsp and probably ltspfs, too,
although ltspfs is currently optional. ltspfs hits the buildd's and
gets built in a quite reasonable amount of time.

we currently have network boot support for i386, amd64 and powerpc, as
well as untested (or poorly tested) network boot support for sparc,
alpha, arm* and mips.

not to mention hurd and kfreebsd. :)

i would like to consider dropping support for most of the architectures,
leaving only i386, amd64, powerpc and maybe arm*, alpha, mips and/or
sparc.

simple to do, just adding the supported architectures to the
architectures line in debian/control.

i'm not sure what process i need to do to get the old architectures
removed once i make new uploads. i get the impression an email to
ftp-masters will be needed to remove them from unstable and testing for
each source package?

i'm not sure what justification is needed to drop support for some
architectures. is the unlikely usefulness of ltsp on an architecture
sufficient to say we drop support for it? what kind do i need to say?

live well,
  vagrant