On Sun, Aug 14, 2016 at 01:34:18AM +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Stephen Gallagher wrote: > > * #1592 - Redefinition of what constitutes a secondary/alternate > > ~ architecture in Fedora (sgallagh, 16:04:18) > > ~ * AGREED: FESCo approves the new alternative architectures plan (+7, > > ~ 0, -0) (sgallagh, 16:11:29) > > Sigh! So the proposal to break Fedora got unanimously approved without > restrictions. I wonder why you requested a mailing list thread to be opened > at all, given that you simply completely ignored the mailing list feedback. > The "feedback request" from the proposal owners was already worded as if the > mailing list thread was only a formality, and it looks like they were right. > > I still do not see why every exotic architecture no real user cares about > has to fail our builds instead of being built in its own koji-shadow sandbox > where it can only break itself. There was no satisfactory answer to that. > Our actual users use x86 machines. Delaying the builds for the machines our > users use by some indefinite time because of some obscure toolchain bug > affecting some toy machine only a couple people at Red Hat or at some > university have sitting on their desk helps no one. Real users do NOT use > dev boards without even a case, FPGA development kits, or similar developer > toys. They use "a computer", which out there in the real world means x86. There's no situation where dev kits / FPGAs would ever become an official Fedora architecture. Even armv7 is built on server hardware (old Calxeda stuff, or new aarch64 servers). Rich. -- Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones Read my programming and virtualization blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com virt-top is 'top' for virtual machines. Tiny program with many powerful monitoring features, net stats, disk stats, logging, etc. http://people.redhat.com/~rjones/virt-top -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
