On Tue, 2012-03-20 at 03:00 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Josh Boyer wrote: > > It's fairly disappointing this was discussed during this meeting without > > being on the agenda that was sent out. This is a rather large item that > > needs a lot of discussion among the various groups in Fedora, and I'm sure > > that I'm not the only person that wasn't aware it was even going to be in > > the meeting today. (Even ignoring the fact that the agenda was sent > > without a proper Subject and easily skipped.) > > I think this should also be brought to larger discussion among packagers as > a whole. ARM as a primary arch is probably going to slow down our builds by > a lot, at least at the beginning. It also means it'd become the maintainer's > job to fix ARM-only build failures. I think ARM should NOT become a primary > arch, period. Having an actively maintained secondary arch is also the best > way to keep improving secondary arch infrastructure with the aim of reducing > the delays between primary arch and secondary arch releases, thereby helping > all secondary arches, not just ARM (and making them all primary sure > wouldn't scale). Changing ARM to a primary arch is the wrong way to get > there, and puts an undue burden on Fedora maintainers as a whole, for the > benefit of a small niche. If you think ARM's a small niche, you may have some large surprising coming your way over the next few years... -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
