On Mon, Jul 29, 2024 at 11:00:36AM -0400, Richard Sent wrote: > For consideration, I know at least one 3rd-party channel relies on being able > to create a multiarch container containing i686 packages. I'll refrain from > linking since it packages nonfree software. This is an example where keeping > an old architecture around is more complicated than simply counting the > number of active machines using said architecture.
People have presented some good reasons for keeping at least some level of i686 support. But unfortunately, 3rd party channels cannot be one of them, whether or not they follow the FSDG. Of course, we won't deliberately make their work more difficult, and maybe we consider their needs if it's easy, but I think they shouldn't be considered to present compelling arguments for us to make decisions within GNU Guix, especially if it involves us doing extra work. > Perhaps we could tally the number of substitutes served for supported > architectures and use that as our metric for liveliness. I'd love this! Not just for deciding when to remove support, but to measure if adding support gains more users.
