For your consideration: Secondary Architectures in Fedora
cweyl at alumni.drew.edu
Wed May 30 00:10:01 UTC 2007
On 5/29/07, Tom spot Callaway <tcallawa at redhat.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-05-29 at 16:00 -0700, Chris Weyl wrote:
> > In other words, by only failing a build when a primary arch fails, we
> > enable the inclusion of many other architectures for those who care
> > about them, without imposing additional burdens on all maintainers
> > (who may not care about them).
> > Otherwise, why bother making a distinction at all?
> Now, when a build fails on a secondary arch, it won't be silent. Emails
> will go out to the architecture team, as well as a daily summary to
> fedora-devel-list on a per-arch basis (e.g. I built these packages
> sucessfully, I tried to build these, but they failed).
Yah. I assume this is where the people interested in the secondary
arches step in -- each arch will have a SIG, SIGs will monitor
failures, investigate, and file bugs when they have a fix for a given
Sounds like a good process to me; opens up the buildsys to more arches
w/o imposing more work (on anyone who isn't wanting that work, at
Ex astris, scientia
More information about the fedora-devel-list