On Wed, Mar 04, 2026 at 01:44:49PM +0000, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 04, 2026 at 01:16:19PM +0000, Michel Lind wrote:
[...]
> > So we probably have two different levels of being a primary
> > architecture - at the package level and at the deliverable level,
> > though one is a precondition for the other.
>
> The decision about deliverables can be done at the level of single
> deliverable. E.g. the amd64 spin with sway may or may not be blocking,
> mostly independently of the status of amd64 _architecture_.
>
> So I think we should still scrap the concept of "secondary
> architectures". For users, we should make them aware of the
> status of individual deliverables.
The phrase "make them aware of the status" is doing some heavy-lifting
here. How would you describe this status? I'm all for simplicity, BTW!
* * *
Since we're split between forum and the list, I'll copy/paste Fabio's
response from the forum[1]; he suggests a classification on "3 axes":
(quote)
I always found this classification less than helpful and mostly
confusing.
For package maintainers, there is no difference between a “Primary”
architecture and an “Alternative” architecture that is also built in
the “primary” koji - if a package build fails on any of the
architectures in either group, the build is marked as “failed”.
So to me this has always seemed as if it is kind of mixing 1)
“marketing” terms with 2) technical / implementation differences and
3) QA guarantees, and creates a confusing classification that isn’t
quite correct from any of the three viewpoints. Maybe it would make
sense to classify architectures on those three axes separately, not
creating a pseudo-classification that doesn’t fit any of them?
(/quote)
At first I thought this is more detailed than is needed and "someone"
needs to keep it all in sync. To which Fabio makes the good point (on
the forum) that:
"it also doesn’t change that often. The last time architecture
support changed was … dropping Big-Endian PowerPC (ppc64)? That was
in Fedora 29"
[1]
https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/primary-vs-alternative-architectures-clarity-on-requirements/182392/2
Regards,
Kashyap
--
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[email protected]
Do not reply to spam, report it:
https://forge.fedoraproject.org/infra/tickets/issues/new
