Peter Robinson wrote:
> Exactly! Ultimately what we need is FESCo to document what are the
> requirements of being promoted to a primary architecture and then it's
> the ARM SIGs job of ensuring they adhere to the requirements, provide
> viable workable alternatives that are acceptable to FESCo, or provide
> proof that the requirement will be met within an agreed time frame.
ARM should most definitely NOT be approved as a primary architecture before
all the requirements are actually met!
We have seen what happened when the EU took Greece's word on the promise
that they'd eventually meet the Maastricht criteria. Let's not do the same
mistake in Fedora!
Kevin Kofler
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
