On Thu, 2016-01-28 at 17:43 -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 1:01 PM, Adam Williamson
> 1) just ditch the i386 columns entirely; openQA can continue testing
> it, and people can test manually if they want, but we don't bother
> tracking the results in the validation pages
How about option 1. That leaves x86_64 and ARM only; and then where
appropriate the distinction between BIOS and UEFI.
Next, duplicate that page, deleting ARM and UEFI, and changing x86_64
and BIOS to i686. i.e., a 32-bit x86 only specific page.
At least it's available. And it might give us some gauge of
interest/activity in testing 32-bit?
Well, it's possible. Speaking selfishly (as the one who's likely going
to wind up doing it), it involves a bit more work than the other
options. It would be included in the 'Summary' pages, I don't know if
that's a good or a bad thing.
I don't know how wide spread the 32-bit being dropped news has
so it may turn out there will be a 32-bit SIG+spin that shows up one
more release. My understanding is releng doesn't have the time to just
axe all of i686 this cycle, so all of it is going to get built.
Well yes, and FESCo explicitly didn't say "no-one's allowed to build
32-bit Intel images any more", just "they're not allowed to be release
blocking". i.e. they explicitly drew a distinction between *not having
the images at all* (which is a pretty big step) and not blocking the
release on them (which is a smaller step).
I think there's sort of an idea that WGs can choose to stop building
32-bit images entirely if they can get releng on board, and of course
there's the possibility of building them but then burying them in
Douglas Adams' filing cabinet (the one in the basement, where the
lights are out, and so are the stairs, and there's a sign on the door
saying Beware Of The Leopard) - i.e. not publicizing their existence at
all. But that's a bit beyond our scope; the Cliff Notes for us are
'there will probably still be at least some i686 images, but they're no
longer release blocking'.
think it's best to do the least amount of work now, that makes it
possible to support a hypothetical 32-bit SIG+spin to do the testing
they'd need to do, to have a quality release. Because it will be
released, and it'll be from Fedora.
Is that reasonable?
Sure, it's an option. I don't hate it. Again on an entirely selfish
level I'd prefer some of the other options purely because they involve
less work, but if enough people would actually perform the 32-bit tests
(and if anyone is going to care about the results) then I'm willing to
make the effort (of course, if someone else wants to do it, that is
also great, I'm happy to lend a hand with any Wikitcms mysteries that
I even think it's reasonable if you just went with option 1;
the derived page as I've described is offered if/when i686 interested
persons show up to the testing party. Honestly if no one asks (and I'm
not asking for it), then that pretty much tells us at least the
testing state of i686.
Yep, that's also a possibility - thanks for the idea.
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net