Brendan Conoboy wrote:
> This was one of the points raised by FESCo yesterday, and it's a fine
> question that we'll be answering better, elsewhere, in due course. That
> said, where does this question lead? If we explain what we're trying to
> get to, will it somehow overcome the objections raised such as build
> system performance? For the sake of coherent discussion, let's assume
> that we have good reasons why we want to move to primary, and we can
> keep the subject on what the requirements are for doing so. The topic
> at hand isn't even ARM specific, it's just been prompted by us ARM
> aficionados. Again, I understand that there do need to be good reasons,
> that's just not the subject of this particular thread.
It doesn't make sense to discuss requirements for becoming a primary
architecture without discussing whether it should be considered in the first
place. I don't see ANY reasons why it's needed. And as I wrote in my first
reply in this thread, I don't think there should be a generic process for
becoming a primary architecture at all, it should be a change done only in
very exceptional cases.
Kevin Kofler
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
