RFC: Primary architecture promotion requirements
blc at redhat.com
Tue Mar 20 19:32:49 UTC 2012
On 03/20/2012 12:19 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
> What does "better than secondary arch" mean to you? I'm really
> struggling here.
As an example, the same koji server handling x86 builds handling ARM
builds. The same facilities providing power, cooling, storage. Subject
to applicability, the same QE mechanisms being employed. The same
release schedule. Comparable positioning on the Fedora downloads pages.
Primary and secondary are night-and-day different, it isn't just the
integrated build system being disconnected, it's end-to-end.
> We as a group have identified many of the roadblocks or pain points of
> bringing arm into primary arch.
What pain points have been described other than "I am concerned about
the impact of builds on the whole running slower than they do now"?
This is not a facetious question, this is really what we're trying to
get from the thread.
Brendan Conoboy / Red Hat, Inc. / blc at redhat.com
More information about the devel