F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

["Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"]

On 07/15/2013 06:09 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> Brendan Conoboy (blc at redhat.com) said:
>> On 07/11/2013 12:37 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
>>> Well, as I said (and you cut out)
>>> ...
>>> I do know what some people want ARM to be in terms of dense
>>> hypserscale servers (32/64-bit)... but the community that would be using
>>> Fedora ARM does seem to be targeting a wider array than that.
>>> ...
>>>
>>> The F19 ARM release released 5 desktop images. You seem to be arguing that
>>> the required featureset of ARM as a primary arch should only be for headless
>>> deployment, but the ARM community itself is saying otherwise.
>> Interests differ between participants.  If this was the only
>> objection to moving ARM to the primary build system I would say
>> let's drop graphics from official Fedora ARM support for the
>> purposes of the move and make all graphical images respins or
>> remixes.
> If I'm understanding you, you would prefer that ARM be blessed with the
> stamp of being a 'primary' arch at the cost of dropping release targets,
> images, and featuresets that are made by and for the community now.
>
> I don't think I can support that - it seems awfully unfriendly to the
> community that exists now.

Having an default/release target has been awfully unfriendly to the 
community that exist and has existed at least since fc6 - f7 ( when we 
introduced live's even longer if you want to count KDE as well ) now and 
just recently with the mate desktop wanting to become default so I dont 
think that argument applies here since not everybody and every sub 
community and every ones contribution to the project is given equal 
treatment as things stand now.

However features should apply to all arch primary or not unless they 
cant for some reason or another be applied to that architecture which 
then should be specifically noted in relevant section in the release notes.

JBG