RFC: Primary architecture promotion requirements

[Matthew Garrett]

On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 01:26:58PM +0000, Peter Robinson wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 11:39 AM, Matthew Garrett <mjg59 at srcf.ucam.org> wrote:
> > The expectation would be that the architecture maintainers have fixed
> > everything before moving to being a primary architecture, so this should
> > only be an issue if maintainers or upstream manage to come up with new
> > breakage. But yes, it forces people to care about something they might
> > previously have ignored, so I guess that's an advantage.
> 
> And we've already being doing that with the vast majority of issues
> already fixed and committed to mainline.

Agreed. I just mean that it's not a terribly significant benefit to 
becoming a primary architecture.

-- 
Matthew Garrett | mjg59 at srcf.ucam.org