On Wednesday 15 November 2006 07:20, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > That made we wondering: hey, sounds nice. And that makes it possible to > get rid of parts from the "secondary arch" concept again IMHO. If a arch > is ready and tested by the arch maintainers: go ship it together with > x86 and x86_64. If not let the maintainers of arch foo add further fixes > to the fc7 branch of the packages and let them ship their "FCx for arch > foo" when they become ready. They just have to be sure that they apply > their fixes to both FCx and devel in that case. But I'm sure they will ;) > > Or am I missing something here? You're not missing anything. We did this for x86_64, it shipped as the release+updates. So long as you're composing your spin from say FC7 shipped srpms, and FC7-updates shipped srpms, there shouldn't be a reason you can't call your arch release FC7. I'll reply to David's post when I have more time, just do note that we will _not_ make any changes to any arches until the shadowbuild feature is in place and functional. -- Jesse Keating Release Engineer: Fedora
Attachment:
pgpS78jsf8KsT.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board mailing list fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
_______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board-readonly mailing list fedora-advisory-board-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board-readonly
