Neal Gompa <ngomp...@gmail.com> writes: > This is not a deprecation change, this is effectively a removal > change. By removing the packages and the tooling support for legacy > BIOS, it makes several scenarios (including recovery) harder. > Moreover, it puts the burden on people to figure out if their hardware > can boot and install Fedora when we clearly haven't reached a critical > mass yet for doing so, like we did when we finally removed the i686 > kernel build.
I've stated in the change that the intent is to eventually remove legacy entirely - so there's no sleight of hand here. The rest is a semantic issue which I don't care to argue. > 2. The packages are locked down so there is no way for the community to help I've replied to this when you said it before, but no, this is misinformation, and I'd appreciate if you stop spreading it. Bootloader packages are available for PRs, same as every other package in the distro. Our bugzilla issues are as open as any other package in the distro. Quite simply, being able to make official builds isn't a requirement to help with any package in the distro, bootloader or otherwise. And to peek behind the curtain a bit, running `fedpkg build` is not even close to the hardest or most time-consuming part of working on bootloader packages. > 3. At various times, people have explicitly said "patches NOT welcome" I see no evidence of this having happened, and it's definitely not something I've said. Be well, --Robbie
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
