RFC: Primary architecture promotion requirements
blc at redhat.com
Tue Mar 20 19:52:58 UTC 2012
On 03/20/2012 12:44 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
> But this *requirements* thread is about acclimation, planning and anticipating the challenges of the climb. Serious climbs may involve days or months of this. So if the analogy holds, a lot of advance work has to be done before ARM actually is promoted to primary. This isn't the go, no-go meeting, or gear-up time. This is the shopping list.
Thank you :-)
> Now the ultra ridiculous: How about secondary architecture requirements demoted as-is to tertiary. And create substantially more aggressive requirements for secondary architecture (in which ARM would be placed), yet are not identical requirements to primary architecture requirements?
Yes, the all-or-nothing mindset between secondary and primary is almost
certainly the root of the problem. We want more representation in
Fedora than being a secondary connotes, but at the same time, ARM today
does not fulfill every aspect of what PA means. The discussion is about
what is required, how to get there. There has to be a way to represent
Fedora's architectural support as a spectrum of features, not simply a
binary assessment. I absolutely do want to get ARM onto the same koji
build system, but don't want to make ARM the mortal enemy of every
packager whose workflow is materially hampered. This discussion has
been quite useful in shaping my opinion that we need to improve the koji
portion of the proposal (Principally because of chain builds), but how
to make those improvements needs to be worked out.
Brendan Conoboy / Red Hat, Inc. / blc at redhat.com
More information about the devel