On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 03:33:27PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 04:01:15PM +0200, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 7:52 PM, Matthew Garrett <mjg59(a)srcf.ucam.org> wrote:
> > That's the point. You don't get to be a primary architecture until
> > you've demonstrated that doing so won't slow down the other
> > architectures
> Is that "you don't get to be a primary architecture unless you have
> demonstrated that nobody outside of the ARM SIG needs to do any work
> on the architecture" == "you don't get to be a primary architecture
> unless it doesn't matter whether you are a primary architecture"?
Promotion is supposed to benefit Fedora, not the architecture being
> > and that requires you to fix all of these problems
> > yourself first.
> That's backwards. For the vast majority of Fedora packagers, ARM
> becoming a primary architecture primarily means that every individual
> package owner is supposed to fix their packages.
So promoting ARM comes at a cost to every individual package maintainer,
who now has to do additional work.
I think that's overstating things a bit. The vast majority of packages
in Fedora "just work" with no extra effort required for ARM. Most of the
ARM specific build problems are dealt with by the ARM SIG already. So the
"extra" work for every package maintainer is the occassional ARM specific
bug that may arise randomly from time-to-time. There will be a few packages
where ARM bugs are more frequent - things that deal with hardware alot like
kernel, kvm & Xorg drivers, but IIUC the ARM SIG has people to help out in
those areas. So I don't think the extra work for package maintainers is all