RFC: Primary architecture promotion requirements

Miloslav Trma─Ź mitr at volny.cz
Wed Mar 21 09:41:33 UTC 2012

On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 10:58 PM, Matthew Garrett <mjg59 at srcf.ucam.org> wrote:
> I think you're looking at this in slightly the wrong way. Being a
> primary architecture isn't meant to be a benefit to the port - it's
> meant to be a benefit to Fedora. Adding arm to the PA list means you'll
> have to take on a huge number of additional responsibilities, deal with
> more people who are unhappy about the impact upon their packages and so
> on. You get very little out of it except that there's more people to
> tell you that something's broken.

I don't think this is true: On a primary architecture, every package
maintainer is be expected to handle their own packages; this should
actually significantly decrease the load on the "architecture

More information about the devel mailing list