Include ia64 tracker bug in review guidelines
 

The package review guidelines [1] do not mention the tracker bug for
ia64 [2] to track 'ExcludeArch: ia64' packages. Should it not be
updated?

Happy hacking,
Debarshi

[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines
[2] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=FE-ExcludeArch-ia64

--
Fedora-packaging mailing list
Fedora-packaging@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging

Include ia64 tracker bug in review guidelines
 

On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 12:43 AM, Debarshi Ray <debarshi.ray@gmail.com> wrote:
> The package review guidelines [1] do not mention the tracker bug for
> ia64 [2] to track 'ExcludeArch: ia64' packages. Should it not be
> updated?
>
Isn't ia64 a secondary arch? It can be hard for the packager and
reviewer to notice an ia64 build failure since Koji does not provide
an ia64 build.

--
Michel Salim
http://hircus.jaiku.com/

--
Fedora-packaging mailing list
Fedora-packaging@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging

Include ia64 tracker bug in review guidelines
 

Michel Salim wrote:

On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 12:43 AM, Debarshi Ray <debarshi.ray@gmail.com> wrote:

The package review guidelines [1] do not mention the tracker bug for
ia64 [2] to track 'ExcludeArch: ia64' packages. Should it not be
updated?


Yes, and the same for the sparc architectures IMHO.
(http://bugzilla.redhat.com/251073)


Isn't ia64 a secondary arch? It can be hard for the packager and
reviewer to notice an ia64 build failure since Koji does not provide
an ia64 build.


Well if a packager hasn't had cause to try a secondary arch build, they
won't have found the need to add an ExcludeArch for that arch either. If
they've added one for whatever reason, it needs to be tracked the same
as any other arch.


The fedora-packager-setup script now includes koji configs for doing
secondary arch builds for those that are interested.


The secondary arch maintainers do rebuilds of most packages to create
the secondary arch releases, and the regular package maintainers get
task completion emails from koji that may alert them to issues with
their packages that they wouldn't have found themselves.


So I say yes, the trackers for secondary arches need to be referenced
the same as the primary arches.


Paul.

--
Fedora-packaging mailing list
Fedora-packaging@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging