On Thu, 2016-08-04 at 11:41 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Thu, 2016-08-04 at 16:07 +0100, Peter Robinson wrote: > > > > Hi All, > > > > We are planning to change the way Alternate Architectures (non x86_64) > > are handled > > in terms of "primary" vs "secondary". The definition of what is > > primary or secondary > > is already handled more in terms of the build artifact outputs (images, LiveCDs, > > installers, containers etc) for i686 deliverables. As part of this redefinition > > this means that the location in "koji instances" of the rpm builds is removed as > > a part of the definition requirement of what constitutes > > primary/secondary and the > > architectures are named "Alternate Architectures" (and Experimental > > architectures > > for the likes of MIPs/RISC-V) as opposed to primary/secondary. As a > > result of this > > change it is planned to merge the old "secondary" koji instances into a single > > koji instance along with all the current "Primary" architectures. > > > > All the details of the proposal along with FAQ have been put on a wiki > > page here[1] > > so please go and read it and ask any questions that aren't answered in > > the FAQ here. > > I do have serious concerns about the impact of this in terms of build > failures. Reading the reply to " Q: Why do I have to worry about > s390x/powerpc/aarch64 when I didn't before?", it implies there will be > no change to koji in terms of build failures: i.e. a failure on *any* > arch will cause the entire build to be failed. Sorry, just saw there was a more specific entry for my concern, "Q: Will a single arch failure affect the overall build failure?" Still not 100% sure, but thanks for addressing it. -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
