Re: Selection of roadmap for i386 platform End-of-Life (EOL)
Justin Sherrill <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.os.dragonfly-bsd.kernel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CA+YR8=34CrzSV5kqwv5q-wNc_d+H-paExbC_h3gcygBdYSKQ-w@mail.gmail.com> |
On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 7:15 AM, John Marino <[email protected]> wrote: > 1) Agreement on the EOL date (or Release if it's pegged to a release) I'd rather peg to a release; I'd assume we'd want to truncate i386 at the time of a release, instead of somewhere between two releases. Since release dates can be a little floaty, that's easier to manage. > 2) A declaration of which road map will be used (method #1 or #2) I don't know what the usage ratio of i386-only machines is at this point; I'd feel more confident if I knew the impact, but there's no way to find that out. #2 (Or Sam's #3) appeals to me just because I've wanted something that could be called a long-term support release for a while. A disadvantage of x86_64 is no linuxlator support, but keeping i386 around isn't going to solve that problem.