On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 6:55 AM, Josh Boyer <jwboyer@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 2:04 AM, Brendan Conoboy <blc@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> The all or nothing element in the above simply serves to discourage further >> contribution and is harming Fedora's growth. The relentless "I don't want > > I don't believe that is true. ARM is useful, I want it to be a > Primary arch, but I fail to see how your middle ground below of having > it be primary in the build system is going to somehow grow Fedora. I > believe there are concerns that it will place additional burden on > package maintainers (like ppc did before there was a real arch team > for it), and that those concerns are valid. To expand on this a bit, how do you believe that merging ARM into the build system is going to encourage growth in Fedora? What will it buy you that you don't already have? At first glance, it gets you slightly more timely builds. However, you've already proven that timely builds isn't an issue at all by having ARM releases ready the same day as primary. So please, elaborate on that in the proposal. You have a lot of what you want listed, but not why. josh -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
