On Tue, 2012-03-20 at 13:03 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote: > > Subject > > to applicability, the same QE mechanisms being employed. > > I don't see SA/PA mattering as much here. It's up to QE what they want > to take on and what they point automated tooling at. In theory...yeah. In boring every day practice, we'd take a lot more heat for 'not QAing a primary arch' than we would for 'not QAing a secondary arch'. I mean, right now, Fedora QA does just about zip for PPC or ARM. And no-one not directly involved in PPC or ARM has ever complained to us about that. If ARM were a primary arch, I rather suspect they would. But sure, in theory, we can do just about anything for a secondary arch that we do for a primary arch, I don't think there's any technical barrier to us doing update karma for ARM and test days for ARM and a release validation process for ARM and all the rest of it. It's just a question of motivation and personpower. -- 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
