> On 21 Oct 2021, at 18:04, Aaron Bauman <b...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 10:05:20AM +0200, Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny wrote: >> Hello, >> =20 >> Splitting from the discussion in [1] (moving more arhitectures to >> ~arch), I'd like to propose that we remove the "security supported" >> architecture list from [2] and instead level security support with >> the general architecture support in Gentoo, e.g. by having all >> architectures with stable profiles be "security supported". >> > > I fully support this approach and have long advocated for it. > > Overall, all stables arches should be security supported and if > they begin lagging behind they should be dropped to unstable. > > I am sure there are some nuances, but this is a great start. > > Let's do it!
+1 for reasons you said + in the original proposal. We don't currently adhere to the stated policy verbatim anyway and I don't think it adds anything right now. best, sam
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
