| 1 |
Il giorno lun 10 feb 2020 alle ore 08:20 Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> |
| 2 |
ha scritto: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> On Sun, 2020-02-09 at 22:51 -0800, Zac Medico wrote: |
| 5 |
> > In that case, I suppose we'll have to apply consistency manually? Can we |
| 6 |
> > all agree on a global order of preference for the relevant packages? |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> That would be my idea, yes. I'd suggest going for the 'lightest' |
| 9 |
> package first. Would you be able to figure out some kind of measure |
| 10 |
> on how heavy each of those packages is? I suppose we need to account |
| 11 |
> for build time and dependencies. |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> All of these packages are pretty old and not receiving commits in years, |
| 14 |
may I suggest that the order should be from the less prone to break to the |
| 15 |
most prone to break? |
| 16 |
I'll leave to maintainers decide on how to assign a vote on resilience, but |
| 17 |
monitoring upstream, active forks and other distro should be taken in |
| 18 |
account. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Best, |
| 21 |
Francesco |
Archives