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

Re: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/TomCallaway/SecondaryArchitectures



On Tue, 2007-07-10 at 15:15 -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:

> By that definition, the primary arches don't qualify either.  They're
> built using RHEL + koji.  Not that I really argue with the definition
> mind you.  Just interesting from a primary vs. secondary requirements
> perspective.

Oh, you mean underneath the buildsystem? Don't care. :) I'd prefer
Fedora, but if it doesn't exist yet, I won't require it.

> > > How are Secondary arch releases suppose to go about getting official
> > > "Fedora" status?
> > 
> > The secondary arch team exists, has a working koji buildsystem, is
> > okayed by FESCo, and has packages (and or trees) ready by either the
> > main Fedora timeline or a reasonable timeline defined by the secondary
> > arch team.
> 
> Back in Nov. 2006, there was also the concept that FPB had to approve a
> secondary arch release before it could be called Fedora.  Are we
> delegating that to FESCo?  This, of course, implies that some form of
> review things occurs at some level.

Outside of the scope of the FPB. 

~spot


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