+1 from me, wiki page sounds reasonable.
However I have some doubt about the scope of the feature and it#s progress (50%), just having the compiler is not worth that much. We should at least have some Go-packages in F-14
(I won't be able to make it for the meeting tonight, that's why I'm voting here)
Two more things: 1. The 'Release Notes' section needs to be enhanced. e.g. info on how to install the required packages. 1. Maybe a comps groups should be added as well.
+1, on the grounds that diversity in this area is not a bad thing.
Not so sure about packaging non-upstream gcc branches, though. Do we have any precedent for that ?
Which compiler do you intend to use? FESCo is not keen on the idea of still having that undecided.
This feature was approved at the 2010-07-13 meeting.
Login to comment on this ticket.