On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 04:30:39PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
I understand what you're saying, but the reason I'm so
insistent on it
is that this isn't just my usual linguistic nitpicking but an entirely
practical issue. When you say 'i686 should be a secondary arch', and
Dennis or Kevin reads it, what they understand by that is exactly what
I've been saying, what you want to call 'koji-secondary'. If someone
sends an 'i686 should be secondary' proposal to FESCo and it gets
passed, what is going to happen is that releng is going to make it a
secondary arch in the strict technical sense of the term I've been
explaining. This is why I think it's rather important to use the term
in the way that's understood by the people in charge of the things that
make the bits. ;)
That's fair, but it goes the other way too — the way the people making
the bits are using the term isn't always obvious to everyone else. It
might be easier to get a few technical users to change their jargon
than it will be to continually explain to incoming contributors that
the words have this precise non-obvious meaning.
--
Matthew Miller
<mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org>
Fedora Project Leader