RFC: Primary architecture promotion requirements

Jesse Keating jkeating at redhat.com
Tue Mar 20 19:19:39 UTC 2012

On 3/20/12 12:14 PM, Brendan Conoboy wrote:
> On 03/20/2012 12:05 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
>> 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?
> I'm willing to temporarily do better than secondary and worse than
> primary on the road to becoming primary. This is a huge transition-
> identifying the right path to make that transition is part of what this
> is about. The whole point of this thread is to establish requirements
> for promotion. Part of that discussion logically includes the steps to
> get there. Currently what I hear is "be as good as x86 and you're
> there." That's not productive. There are legitimate issues with moving
> to PA so we're having this discussion to identify them and ultimately
> work through them.

What does "better than secondary arch" mean to you?  I'm really 
struggling here.

We as a group have identified many of the roadblocks or pain points of 
bringing arm into primary arch.  You're suggested solution in this 
sub-thread is effectively treating arm as secondary arch, and when asked 
about this, you've avoided the question, once again, of what it is you 
expect to get out of being primary arch.

I'm really not sure how much more rational discussion we can have here.

Jesse Keating
Fedora -- FreedomĀ² is a feature!

More information about the devel mailing list