RFC: Primary architecture promotion requirements

[Jesse Keating]

On 3/20/12 11:59 AM, Brendan Conoboy wrote:
> I haven't run this by anybody yet, so if it's nonsense just say so, but...
>
> Would it be reasonable to, even amongst primary architectures, allow
> these steps to go forward even if one arch fails while another succeeds?
>   Let's say we have arch-groups in primary- i686 and x86_64 are in a
> group, armv7hl and armv5tel are in a group.  The results of one group do
> not inhibit the progress of another.  Feasible with a bit of retooling,
> or a nightmare waiting to happen?  The discussion so far has focused
> almost exclusively on build time.  We hear you.  Let's talk about what
> to do about it.  And what concerns there are besides build time.

What you are describing is what we tried to do, which resulted in 
secondary arches.  The primary arch group can move on with life, while 
the secondary arch plods along, hopefully finishing.  If it doesn't 
finish, it can catch up later, but for the primary arches, life moves on.

So if you're willing to live like that, I must ask again, what do you 
think you'll be getting out of being a primary arch?

-- 
Help me fight child abuse: http://tinyurl.com/jlkcourage

- jlk