RFC: Primary architecture promotion requirements

Dennis Gilmore dennis at ausil.us
Wed Mar 21 18:17:51 UTC 2012

Hash: SHA1

On Wed, 21 Mar 2012 10:12:58 -0400
Josh Boyer <jwboyer at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 9:52 AM, Peter Jones <pjones at redhat.com>
> wrote:
> > On 03/21/2012 09:21 AM, Josh Boyer wrote:
> >
> >> Except when people are forced to look at it, their solution was
> >> often ExcludeArch for PPC.  As I said in the other thread, you
> >> cannot force people to care about an architecture they don't know
> >> or want to learn.
> >
> >
> > That suggests we need a FTBFS-like nightly test that lets us know
> > about new, unexpected ExcludeArches in the distro.
> Possibly.  There are ExcludeArch trackers that people are supposed to
> make their bugs block and that was normally sufficient to give the
> arch team a heads up.  However, I'm sure there were packages that
> didn't have bugs filed like that.

the main issue is that we need to have tracking in place that doesnt
require people do anything. because people dont do what they should.  I
see it all the time when dealing with mass rebuilds etc  people do one
or 2 of the steps to remove a package, but quite often do not do all
3.  We do have plans to redo it to make it a single step.  the more we
can automate the tracking of it the better we will nknow the full
extent of where things are. if we can cut down on what people have to
do the more likely it will be that we have true representation of the

Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (GNU/Linux)


More information about the devel mailing list