On Fri, Mar 07, 2014 at 03:04:15PM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
My concern would be that without it being an official target from
start, we run the risk of brokenness being found late in the game.
Does it seem possible to add an "official" designation to ARM (and
i686 for that matter) if things prove to be working by whatever cutoff
date we have? That would seem to put more impetus on the people doing
the things you suggest without us declaring either of those
architectures by default.
Yeah, I think that it would be an error to commit to it until there's
been a demonstration that this is achievable - and the onus should be
on the ARM people to demonstrate that. I don't want to end up with one
of our first deliverables being a sub-par experience. If it can't run
Shell reliably and with adequate performance then it buys us nothing to
I'm not as optimistic as some when it comes to viable
graphics hardware on ARM in the F21 timeframe. If testing of
Workstation ARM can't even begin until things are merged, and that
happens at the tail end of the development window, I don't really want
us to be stuck in the blocker/demotion game if it doesn't happen.
Opportunistic "promotion" seems a decent compromise.
Not going to disagree.
Matthew Garrett | mjg59(a)srcf.ucam.org