[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [fab] Secondary Arches



Hi!

Some "me, too" here:

Josh Boyer schrieb:
> First, I think secondary arches are a good idea.

+1

> [...]
>  There are two key issues that are
> essentially taking a great idea and sinking it immediately.  In order
> for secondary arches to really work, I believe the arch teams need to be
> able to host repositories along side the primary arches on
> fedoraproject.org, and binary isos for the arches (if available) should
> also be hosted.

+1

>[...]
> "But we can't BUILD the packages on these arches, so why should we host
> them?"  What difference does that make?  If the Board is going to allow
> secondary arches built on servers _outside_ of the Fedora buildsys to
> carry the Fedora name, then explain to me why those packages cannot sit
> on fedoraproject.org.

+1

> Also, hosting repositories/isos outside of fedoraproject.org basically
> means those arches lose another major benefit, which is mirroring.  The
> fedora mirror structure is fairly good, and trying to achieve something
> of similar numbers will simply be very difficult to accomplish.  Mirrors
> can choose not to mirror secondary arches if they wish.  Let them make
> that choice.

+1

It will will probably also lead to questions like "why doesn't the
yum.conf from <insert forum, faq, irc, whatever here> not working on
arch foo". I'd like to avoid that.

> I strongly urge the Board to consider these points before coming to a
> final policy for secondary arches.  I want to see this change turn into
> a great move for Fedora, and not just a "dumping of work" as some are
> already perceiving it to be.

+1

CU
thl


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]