| 1 |
On Mon, 25 Mar 2013, Tobias Klausmann wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> Hi! |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> On Mon, 25 Mar 2013, Markos Chandras wrote: |
| 6 |
>> On 25 March 2013 09:30, Tobias Klausmann <klausman@g.o> wrote: |
| 7 |
>>> I'll say it again: if we don't make install media anymore and |
| 8 |
>>> tell people to use SRCD instead, we will lose installation |
| 9 |
>>> support for at least alpha, ppc/64, hppa and ia64. As for sparc, |
| 10 |
>>> mips and arm, there _might_ be alternatives, but I'm not aware of |
| 11 |
>>> them. |
| 12 |
>>> |
| 13 |
>> |
| 14 |
>> We can suggest SRCD as an alternative just for the amd64/x86 isos |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> WFM. Note that I _agree_ that all the install image building is |
| 17 |
> eating time and is a source for errors. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
While I've personally recommended users to use SRCD and use it myself for |
| 20 |
a few things, I won't stop working on the amd64 / x86 releases. |
| 21 |
Also, from a QA standpoint, having automated builds is very important as |
| 22 |
it allows us to catch many problems with the tree or specific packages. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
> Thing is, if we only build them for fringe archs, we might run |
| 25 |
> into the "oh well, it's just for those few dozen users, it |
| 26 |
> doesn't matter if it's slightly broken" effect. Even though the |
| 27 |
> images were broken for the mainstream, it took quite a while (and |
| 28 |
> a longish thread) for them to be fixed/taken care of. Imagine if |
| 29 |
> they'd only been broken for ppc64 and alpha. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
As I said, I won't stop working on the amd64 / x86 releases. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
> While my arch team (alpha) is very lucky to have armin76 taking |
| 34 |
> good care of the images, not all of them have somebody like him |
| 35 |
> (who seems to have 36h-days and never sleeping). And if we drop |
| 36 |
> support for the ISO on amd64/x86, fewer people will probably care |
| 37 |
> about it, putting more strain on the already thinly-spread arch |
| 38 |
> teams to fix stuff and track upstream package changes. |
| 39 |
> |
| 40 |
> Recommending SRCD as an alternative sounds fine by me, especially |
| 41 |
> for the sheer volume of possible hardware combinations in |
| 42 |
> amd64-land. But we should still think of our own ISOs as |
| 43 |
> something supported on all arches we want to offer. |
| 44 |
> |
| 45 |
> Regards, |
| 46 |
> Tobias |
| 47 |
|
| 48 |
|
| 49 |
Regards, |
| 50 |
Jorge |
Archives