On Tue, 2007-05-29 at 16:00 -0700, Chris Weyl wrote:
Isn't this exactly the point of secondary architectures, tho?
Maintainers are already on the hook to ensure their packages are 1)
functioning or 2) tracked for the primary architectures, one of which
many have probably never directly used. Relaxing the rules for
secondary architectures would allow support for those architectures to
be added automatically to the buildsys w/o imposing additional burdens
on our (mostly unpaid!) maintainers. If it's really documentation or
tracking secondary arch build failures, I'm sure a koji report could
be rigged to do much the same.
I think that this is the key question that we need to be asking here:
For what is a package maintainer actually responsible? Right now it's
just primary arches. Do we want to add a lot of secondary arches right
now and make lives harder for people?
--Chris