On 29/03/2024 19.44, Steven Robbins wrote:
On Thursday, March 28, 2024 8:51:01 A.M. CDT Michael R. Crusoe wrote:Therefore I personally conclude that: Support Debian-Med packages for 32-bit and/or big-endian architectures is not a good use of our limited resources.
I am left with a question whether that is what you are proposing, or whether you mean to preemptively restrict the architectures even when they are not troublesome? I would support the former but the latter position seems unwarranted to me.
At least the first, but preferably also the second. Why waste the computing resources / climate damage / maintainer time when that does not benefit our users? Yes, it is true that compiling for 32-bit and/or big-endian architectures occasionally highlights coding errors that were otherwise hidden and could cause problems later. But I'm proposing that it isn't worth it, and that if a member of the team wishes to restrict the architectures built, they should do so.
Like all policy proposals, this is not meant to be a hard rule for all time. We can and should revisit the issue later!Absolutely. The working set of machines does change over time as you mention yourself. I remember doing neuroinformatics research coding on SGI IRIX machines -- which will surely date me. :-)
:-D
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
