On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 1:54 PM, Stephen John Smoogen <smo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5 June 2018 at 12:49, Jeff Backus <jeff.bac...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 10:07 PM, Matthew Miller < > mat...@fedoraproject.org> > > wrote: > >> > >> On Mon, Jun 04, 2018 at 03:50:34PM -0400, Jeff Backus wrote: > >> > Thanks for the data. 25k is still a pretty healthy number. :) I > realize > >> > >> Yeah, absolutely. And it's likely that those mirror numbers undercount, > >> because not every system checks in daily, and then there's also NAT. > >> > >> But, my gut feeling is that about half of those are not using a current > >> release _anyway_. Honest question: do you think that 12k would still > >> count as a healthy number? I mean, it's not peanuts. But maybe it'd be > >> better served by a Fedora remix (or similar) specifically targetting > >> older and low-powered systems? > > > > > > Good question. I think it would be more productive to think in > percentages > > instead of raw numbers, in this case. There are a lot of FOSS projects > out > > there that would love to have 12k users. :) > > > > Certainly, I would consider 10% a healthy number when talking about > portion > > of user base. I would even argue that 1% is still a healthy number, > > particularly with regard to decisions that have a reasonable chance of > > disenfranchising those affected. While I hate seeing people leave a > > community, I wouldn't be able to defend 0.1%. So, somewhere in there is > my > > general boundary. > > > > Now cost changes all of that, of course. Obviously if 75% of our effort > is > > going to please 10%, then 10% isn't a healthy number. > > > > Clearly effort is going into enabling Fedora to work on non-SSE2 systems > by > > teams invested in the success of Fedora in general and not the success of > > non-SSE2 systems in particular. I just don't know how to quantify it. > > > > Based on Smooge's awesome numbers, it looks like x86_32 is in the 2.3% > > range. It would be interesting to see how this stacks up to AArch64 and > > other secondary arches. Unfortunately, what complicates things is how > x86_32 > > is so intertwined with x86_64. > > > > It is also complicated in that most of the large sites using aarch64 > and arm32 do so in ways which make them uncountable. They will have > 'thousands' of nodes but all of them use an internal mirror so we see > them as only 1.. > Good point. Does this affect x86_64, as well? > The other issue is that the arm/aarch64 have active upstream help from > people who are building the boards. There isn't any such support on > the x86_32 side with the manufacturers getting to the point of saying > "here is $20.00 and an ebay link.. buy at least a pentium iv or v > please. " The question that the x86 group needs to figure out is how > many of the 3800 active systems are going to not have SSE2. > re: upstreams - Agreed. Clearly we are on borrowed time. re: SSE2 - Agreed. We might be able to do some clever filtering with Bugzilla to get an idea... > > To your point re: a remix, that is an option we've discussed within the > SIG > > and is one we are open to exploring. A remix wouldn't resolve issues > > introduced by enabling SSE2 by default, unless we maintained a parallel > set > > of packages e.g. i586 (which I've already been warned about. :) ) > > > >> > >> > that there are a lot of unknowns in the data, so it is difficult to > draw > >> > any hard conclusions, but 25k is still much larger than 0. Splitting > >> > into > >> > i686 into i586 and i686 would give more insight into who still needs > >> > non-SSE2... Probably hurts my argument, though. :) > >> > >> Soooooo.... this is the kind of thing that more a detailed hardware > >> census could really help us with! > > > > > > Yes, I would agree :) > > > > So it would probably be a lot more detailed than other sites are > running. I looked at the popcorn data and they seem to count whether > an OS is i386 or amd64 not if the CPU is pentium iii. Neither did any > of the other OS census programs. > Thanks for looking. It's unfortunate, but not surprising. -- Jeff Backus jeff.bac...@gmail.com http://github.com/jsbackus
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/N5KOEDV5N5DA5B45UT3WIRCFTGNUODN4/
