On Wed, 2007-07-11 at 07:02 -0400, Jesse Keating wrote: > They stopped because it led to a lot of weird package situations and > mixed results. It was not a very good situation, it only made > you /think/ you were moving on correctly when you really weren't and > should have rebuilt everything with the new version once it was fixed > anyway instead of keeping going. You're right to remind us of the problems with this, btw. It's exactly the kind of hell that Spot's proposal as-is would have us impose on the secondary architectures. If packages are going to be absent on any given architecture, that should happen only through a conscious decision on the part of the maintainer -- not just automatically after a build failure which is probably going to turn out to be a generic issue when it's investigated anyway. -- dwmw2 -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
