On 04/18/2012 07:13 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
Huh? The whole point of this item is that it's architecture
neutral- the kernel team for security reasons believes it important
that all kernel builds take less than 4 hours from start to finish.
Why would a new architecture change that number? There's a caveat
in the suggested wording above. Don't understand the resistance.
The kernel team may have their view skewed by how likely they think it
is that a given architecture will be likely to force additional
rebuilds. So yes, the point of this document is that it's architecture
neutral, and so it's inappropriate for it to list figures that have been
quoted for a specific architecture.
This is very puzzling. As part of your proposal we had the discussion
with the kernel team and they came back with the answer for this
proposal. Now you don't want it. If you don't want to kernel team's
answer, why mention them at all? If it's a general principle for a
braod spectrum of packages that's entirely sensible and the document
shoudl say so. If we're specifically calling out the kernel and nothing
else it's nonsense to ignore the answer to the question.
Not really. You could potentially satisfy number 8 without satisfying
number 5, and you could satisfy number 5 without satisfying number 8.
As you like.
--
Brendan Conoboy / Red Hat, Inc. / b...@redhat.com
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
