Feedback on secondary architecute promotion requirements draft

[Peter Robinson]

On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 12:57 PM, Josh Boyer <jwboyer at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 6:26 PM, Matthew Garrett <mjg59 at srcf.ucam.org> wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 08:10:12PM -0700, Brendan Conoboy wrote:
>>> > All supported platforms must have kernels built from the Fedora
>>> > kernel SRPM and enabled by default in the spec file. Each kernel must
>>> > be built in a timely manner for every SRPM upload.
>>>
>>> What exactly is timely?  What margin is acceptable?  Is this only
>>> for kernel or does this apply to any package with a
>>> much-longer-than-average build time?  What would constitute being in
>>> that class?  Or should the class be critical-path packages?
>>> Something else?
>>
>> The kernel's kind of a special case due to the relatively frequent
>> security updates. The exact nature of what kind of speed is required
>> would probably need to be discussed with the kernel team.
>
> It was, on the kernel list:
>
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/kernel/2012-March/003702.html
>
> (Max build time for the kernel: 4 hours).

With luck, and I use the term tongue in cheek, we should be able able
to use DeviceTree in the F-18+ time frame and reduce the number of
kernels we have and hence the build time greatly but only time will
tell.

Peter