On Wed, 2015-02-25 at 14:01 +0000, Peter Robinson wrote: > > > This is an opportunity for community members for whom i686 is a > > > passion to join the team to participate in the bugfixing > > > required. We previously called out the need for assistance[2], > > > but had no substantial response. We hope that being transparent > > > about our priorities will prompt interested community members to > > > help. If you are interested to help, here are some resources to > > > get started: > > <snip> > > > > Given our past history with passive requests for help, I think it > > might be beneficial to put a time limit on things. For example, if > > no i686 Kernel SIG steps up and agrees to handle bugs on that > > platform, we should strongly consider demoting i686 to secondary > > architecture for installation media at the Fedora 23 branch point > > (about six months from now). > > > > Note: I'm only suggesting that we would demote the kernel and > > install media, *NOT* the 32-bit runtime libraries on an x86_64 > > system; we would still need to be building those. > > How do you propose demoting to secondary only the kernel/install > without the userspace? Do you mean de-emphasise the i686 bit > platform? > Well, that was more a political and rel-eng statement than a technical one. Effectively, we'd not build the kernel package or do release- blocking composes of i686 media. However, the Koji build-system would still have to be capable of producing i686 builds as a primary architecture. So yes, from a purely technical standpoint, it's a muddy statement.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
