On Tue, 2007-05-29 at 18:44 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote: > Jeff Spaleta wrote: > > If the maintainer decides to excludearch > > that arch... then so be it...but its then at least documented for > > later investigation. > > afaik, that's already current practice (ie, ExcludeArch requires a bug > to be filed). > > -- Rex > Except that we're talking about adding a few more architectures here - sparc, arm, etc. That's a much larger matrix and the problems are likely to be much larger than what we have today. Right now inside of Red Hat we've had this problem I call "spending 50% of your time on 3% of your user base." I don't want to end up in a situation where we have build failures holding up major development work when those architectures aren't relevant to most developers nor most users. But at the same time, those developers who are passionate about that platform will enjoy a power that most people don't have: the ability to (responsibly!) fix up a large number of packages across the tree. There's a trade off here, but I think it's a good one. --Chris -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
