Dealing with PPC in Fedora 9(+)

[Jesse Keating]

On Mon, 12 Nov 2007 14:40:31 -0500
David Woodhouse <dwmw2 at infradead.org> wrote:

> I don't believe it's realistic to make changes to the hosting and
> mirroring arrangements either -- let's stick with the plan of keeping
> them in the 'normal tree' which you called a last resort.
> 
> We'll plan to have each spin ready on time, so it can go out fairly
> much synchronously with the i386 and x86_64 releases -- and more to
> the point, with precisely the same package set. If for some reason we
> slip, let's impose a rule that we may not ship any packages in the
> PPC spin which are not in rawhide (for the RCs) or f9-updates (for
> the release).
> 
> OK?

This seems a reasonable compromise all together.  I can be happy with
this for Fedora 9.  Hopefully by the time 9 is let loose, we'll have
had at least one other full fledged secondary arch up and running and
proving that the method can work.

@Board folks, can this be approved at your next meeting, or do I need
to drive this through FESCo ?

-- 
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- All my bits are free, are yours?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/attachments/20071112/5074f41d/attachment.sig>