Re: x86_64-v2 in Fedora

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Okay,
So here comes another naive suggestion.

The metrics that are desired are really innocuous content which should
not risk anonymity, correct? Such things like BIOS/UEFI/?, CPU, Memory,
installed edition or spin, when it was installed, optional packages,
storage setup, etc... I presume. Why not create install time json file
with desired info, which is available info at the time, show the user
the content and ask for permission to transmit the file encrypted to
<fedora server of your choice>. Or even make it a non-fungable file
maybe, which gets generated at update time too with additional info
like package diff etc... Instead of a tool say that is continuously on.

Stephen Snow


On Thu, 2021-06-17 at 13:10 -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 10:36:47AM -0500, Ron Olson wrote:
> > Apologies in advance if this is laughable naïveté, but would a
> > possible solution be to have a different repo for packages compiled
> > against the latest-n-greatest architectures, and packagers could
> > choose to include their packages in there, similar to EPEL?
> > Packages in this hypothetical repo could be marked to replace
> > existing ones via %obsoletes or some other mechanism; this would
> > give the user the control to decide if he or she wants to switch to
> > a “higher-performant” version and not have to rely on HW checks or
> > telemetry.
> > 
> > Just a thought.
> 
> Sure, thats possible, however it would use a lot of resources. ;( 
> 
> * builder cpu cycles and disk
> * mirror disk space
> * buildsystem disk space
> * mirroring BW
> etc. 
> 
> and... the most important resource: everyone's time. If you have
> multiple versions of your package you have to ask everyone in bug
> reports which one they are using, you might not be able to duplicate
> due
> to lack of hardware, you have 2x as many things to worry about, etc. 
> 
> So, while thats very possible, I fear we don't have the resources to
> do
> it. (Nor do I think the benifits are worth it currently). 
> 
> kevin
> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> 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/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
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/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux