[fab] Architecture Policy.

[Mike McGrath]

On 11/21/06, David Woodhouse <dwmw2 at infradead.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-11-21 at 11:38 -0500, Greg Dekoenigsberg wrote:
> > +1 to Seth's point.  But beyond that...
>
> Would you care to suggest alternative nomenclature? I personally happen
> to think that 'package-monkey' is a perfect term -- it definitely
> describes my maintenance of the one gtk+dbus package I own (and which
> I'm trying to get rid of) to a tee.
>
> > David, what would you suggest?  In the abstract case:
> >
> > 1. A packager will almost always be packaging primarily for x86 or
> > x86_64;
> >
> > 2. A packager will almost never have access to the hardware to test on
> > other arches.
>
> Packagers always have at least remote access to PowerPC machines if they
> need it.
>

To build yes, but building is only half the battle.

            -Mike