Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: > On Sat, Sep 14, 2024 at 10:17:16AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> Each of these approaches may have its pros and cons, but I somehow >> do not see that the newly proposed alternative is 10x better than >> what was reviewed and queued already to be worth the effort to >> replace it. > > That's my feeling, too, but I'd reserve final judgement to see Dscho's > response; it's possible I am under-estimating the 32/64-bit confusion > risk. FWIW, what you said matches my recollection from years ago ;-) back when I had to deal with that. > I'd also note that his patch does not require bumping the distro > version, which would let us continue testing that old version in GitHub > Actions. That might be worth considering. Yes, that is true. Considering that 16.04 has passed its expiration date for standard support a few years ago, I am not sure how many more years of practical/unsupported use and testing we would be getting by giving cycles for the release in CI, though. Thanks.
