Re: F37 Change: Deprecate Legacy BIOS (System-Wide Change proposal)

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

 



Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski <dominik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> On Wednesday, 06 April 2022 at 13:07, Richard Hughes wrote:
>> Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski <dominik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>>> and on its way out.  As it ages, maintainability has decreased, and
>>>> the status quo of maintaining both stacks in perpetuity is not viable
>>>> for those currently doing that work.
>>>
>>> Have you tried getting more people involved?
>> 
>> I don't think that's how Open Source works. Realistically the way I
>> see this playing out is that the people responsible for maintaining
>> the legacy boot stack will retire the packages,
>
> I thought they would be orphaned, if anything. Retiring seems rather
> hostile to the people who still need those packages

Assume good intent, please :)

I believe Richard's comment is about a hypothetical future, not what's
written in the change propsal in front of us.  I also don't think
Richard's point in any way hinges on the distinction between orphaning
and retiring.

> (which are those, by the way?).
>
> It's helpful to show the change proponents attitude. As a way of
> "asking more people to get involved", I'd expect a list of packages
> the change proponents no longer whish to maintain and a date when they
> will orphan them, since they've stated they're going to do that
> anyway. Without such list it's difficult to assess the scope of the
> work required to maintain the affected software stack. I don't see any
> such details in the change proposal.

There's no list there because I don't believe that's a helpful way to
view the problem.  For instance, grub2 supports both legacy and UEFI
paths - so one can't cleanly say "this package supports one, this
package supports the other" like when trimming a dependency chain.
(This is especially true when thinking about bootloaders, which tend
toward being small operating systems unto themselves.)  It's more
realistic to consider use cases: legacy is a separate system bringup
path.  The work is the entire path, not a package.

(Lest I be accused of dodging the question: for me, the relevant
packages are parts of grub2 and all of syslinux.)

Be well,
--Robbie

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
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