On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 10:06 AM, Stephen John Smoogen <smo...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 28 June 2017 at 07:54, Josh Boyer <jwbo...@fedoraproject.org> wrote: >> On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 11:20 PM, Adam Williamson >> <adamw...@fedoraproject.org> wrote: >>> On Tue, 2017-06-27 at 22:07 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote: >>>> >>>> I cannot argue with the criteria as you have set forth. However, I >>>> never said we should block the release. I said it should work on the >>>> architectures it does today. That is more than x86_64. We *know* we >>>> have significant interest from multiple parties around Server on other >>>> architectures. This comes from both the project sponsor and from >>>> parties representing those architectures. They are even participating >>>> members in the Server WG. So while you may not hold a Fedora release >>>> for it, I do not think it is out of line to come into a Modular Server >>>> release with the intention of it actually working across multiple CPU >>>> architectures. >>> >>> Well, there is of course potentially a gap between "the intention of it >>> actually working" and...actually working :) >> >> One we bridge well today, given that it works on things other than x86_64. > > But does it work by design or accident on those. And I don't mean that > snarkily but in a "we actually haven't looked at making it work and > focused on other parts versus looking at it at all."
We have people that test it on all the architectures it is produced, and report and try to resolve bugs found. > In the end, we need to make this a concrete proposal. What resources > are we going to get to make sure that it can work on whatever other > architectures are being added to the list? Will these people be Nothing is being added. We already produce Server on these architectures. > dedicated to make this work and what are all the groups outside of > either modularity or server group which might be needed to make it > work? And what architectures are we talking about as must haves? Everyone seems to be misunderstanding what I'm saying. I am not saying we need to make all architectures release blocking. I am saying that we should aim to preserve status quo today, where Server is produced across all architectures and issues preventing it from being produced are clearly reported. That way people that are interested in these architectures can work towards keeping the Server Edition a viable option, irregardless of whether it is release blocking or not. Now, I would *love* to make Server release blocking on x86_64, ppc64le, and aarch64. However, that's a discussion that needs to happen with the Server WG in terms of what criteria are required, etc. I believe that may have started for aarch64 in some way, which is great. But that's orthogonal from modularity. josh _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
