On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 04:52:05PM +0200, Kamil Paral wrote: > I don't really understand this, and I haven't read the meeting log, so I > apologize if my questions are dumb. I was in the meeting, and I was confused - so your questions aren't dumb. :) > Why would we dictate that Editions/Spins can't use different software on > different architectures? It might make perfect sense to use browser X on > x86_64 because it's very good, but use browser Y on i386 because of memory > limitations of i386 arch (browser Y needing much less memory than browser > X). Similarly, if shell A no longer supports i386, why would be ban it from > being preinstalled on x86_64? i386 would have shell B instead. Those are > random examples, but it seems to me that they can be completely valid. If > there's such requirement that Editions/Spins can't install different > software on different arches, I think that should be established by FESCo, > not us. I concur with Kamil on this one, I think there's valid reasons a package set might be different based on the arch. If this is indeed the direction we want to go, I think FESCo needs to make that call. > For this particular Firefox example, what is the core problem that you're > trying to fix here? Is it the fact that Firefox excluded many arches from > builds? From my QA POV, since it excluded arm, it's a blocker, since arm is > primary. If it hadn't excluded arm, it would not be a blocker, and > alternate arches would need to find a way (fix the bug or use a different > browser). If you still think this should not happen, you could ask FESCo to > present some rules saying when Fedora packagers can exclude other arches > from the build and when they can't. We could then enforce that (instead of > prohibiting different package sets). As I think I said in the meeting, I thought the bug as filed was the blocker and didn't see the need for the shadow bug created to track blockeriness. It was a secondary affect, sure; but we deal with that all the time. I concur that it might be a good idea to keep a list (FESCo generated probably?) of "key" packages that need to be available on all arches, or what arches they're allowed to not use. // Mike -- Fedora QA _______________________________________________ test mailing list -- test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to test-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
