Change: Build_x86-64-v3_Packages #3599
Labels
No labels
document it
fast track
meeting
next release
nonresponsive maintainer
packager revocation
pending announcement
provenpackager
python 2 exception
self contained change
stalled
Status
Accepted
Status
Duplicate
Status
Insufficient data
Status
Invalid
Status
Rejected
system wide change
updates policy exception
vote-in-progress
No milestone
No project
No assignees
8 participants
Notifications
Due date
No due date set.
Dependencies
No dependencies set.
Reference
fesco/tickets#3599
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue
No description provided.
Delete branch "%!s()"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
Build x86_64_v3 packages in addition to the current x86_64_v1 builds.
Owners, do not implement this work until the FESCo vote has explicitly ended.
The Fedora Program Manager will create a tracking bug in Bugzilla for this Change, which is your indication to proceed. See the FESCo ticket policy and the Changes policy for more information.
REMINDER: This ticket is for FESCo members to vote on the proposal. Further discussion should happen in the Discourse discussion linked above. Additional discussion may happen on the Fedora Devel mailing list.
Metadata Update from @alking:
@siosm I updated the tooling to add links to the Devel post, but there was no Devel post with the same title for this change request, so it was left off. I am thinking it should have a post there given the timeline on https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3591.
right now the devel list posts are moderated, so I process them when I get up... it should be there now.
I guess I can adjust it to not need moderation now.
-1 on this change for me. I think its a ton of wasted resources for little gain. I think other approaches should be tried.
Metadata Update from @decathorpe:
If the folks working on this are willing to contribute resources to make it work, I think it's perfectly reasonable. Maybe we'll even get more builders out of this.
+1
FYI, just so they're notified: @lleyton, @kylegospo, @owensz
So if I understand correctly, this would build everything for both arch levels, which would indeed be a massive amount of storage and build time.
We would also have to provide -v3 container/bootc/rpm-ostree images alongside the current ones.
I'm conflicted. This would be really nice but the amount of work would be significant.
Maybe a proposal that also takes into account the problems we have with i686 support (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Drop_i686_support) would be easier to accept.
The amount of technical work to enable it isn't significant unless we're only selectively building stuff. Building everything is easy, building only some things is hard.
At today's FESCo meeting, it was decided that the Change proposers will perform some performance comparisons as well and impact analysis and will come back to FESCo with additional data in about three weeks.
Metadata Update from @sgallagh:
Metadata Update from @sgallagh:
This was proposed in the meeting today, but we did not have quorum. FESCo members, please vote (again, if you already voted in the meeting) here.
Proposal: Reject Change for F45. Change Owners are encouraged to resubmit the Change for F46 once the additional data is provided.
(FESCo requests performance comparisons as well as impact analysis and details about how to handle install media)
+1
+1
+1
+1
(I'm counting @salimma's in-meeting +1 vote)
Passed (+5, 0, -0)