Hi everyone, I have a small issue with the review of the v8 package that I'm currently looking at: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=634909#c18 The short story is this; the packaging guidelines state that for every architecture a package doesn't build on, the .spec should list an ExcludeArch:, which should be updated with a specific #bz link. I derive my understanding for this requirement from: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Architectures#ExcludeArch_.26_ExclusiveArch Which says: "By using ExcludeArch on an arch by arch basis, it enables the majority of packages to have the chance to build on new secondary architectures, rather than being immediately ignored by a blanket ExclusiveArch." In this case, with v8 basically being little more than a Javascript compiler / JIT system, it's not so much a package with portability problems than a package which is genuinely going to take serious work to get going on other architectures other than the current x86/arm. It doesn't make a lot of sense to me to ask Lubomir, the packager, to change the current ExclusiveArch, because I think that is the more correct expression of what this software supports. However, as a MUST: requirement this is a review blocker. Now, what to do? I suppose in a sense this is a Packaging Committee issue, however, the packaging guidelines and the review guidelines are separate documents - and I don't get the sense from the review guidelines that there is an established method of overriding a MUST: Obviously for expeditious reasons the change to the .spec could be made to "dance the dance" as it were, but would I really get put on the naughty step if I thought it should be approved as-is? Thanks Alex. -- This message was scanned by Better Hosted and is believed to be clean. http://www.betterhosted.com -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
