#1655 Architecture demotion process
Closed: Insufficient data 6 years ago Opened 7 years ago by jwboyer.

FESCo currently has an Architecture Promotion process [1], however it does not have the equivalent demotion process. Demotion of an architecture has only happened twice in Fedora project history. The first was the demotion of PowerPC starting with the F13 release. The second is currently happening with i686. The nature of these demotions was very different.

PowerPC was demoted wholesale. There was much discussion around the value of keeping it active for a smaller user base, and the end result was a non-unanimous vote to demote. At the time, this meant it was a literal cutoff in koji and on the mirrors starting with the F13 tag. That left existing users with no upgrade path and an abrupt and, from their perspective, unplanned EOL for their architecture.

i686 has followed a more subtle and drawn out demotion. Starting with Fedora 24, the kernel team stated that i686 (and PAE) kernels were low priority and required further community help to keep them well maintained beyond simply being built[2]. The Editions expressed little interest in having i686 media produced. Beginning with Fedora 25, Server and Cloud requested no i686 media be produced, and FESCo declared that i686 specific issues could not block the release. Beginning with Fedora 26, i686 is officially declared alternative architecture status and moved off of the primary mirrors. However, the new definition of an Alternative architecture means that i686 packages continue to be built.

Of the two methods and user experiences, I personally believe the path i686 took to be better. It provides a longer duration for users to migrate, it has several clear checkpoints in determining usage and interest, and it allows for clear planning around the demotion itself. It also mirrors in effect several of the steps required to promote an architecture, providing parity with that process.

I will begin drafting a process for discussion soon based on the above history and intention.

[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Secondary_Architecture_Promotion_Requirements
[2] It should be noted the kernel team actually went above and beyond their stated intentions and continued to investigate and fix 32-bit issues that were deemed severe enough. This continued into Fedora 25 as well, however staffing changes prior to the F25 release made this continued "undeclared" work somewhat less feasible.


@jwboyer were you going to draft a demotion process here for FESCo to approve?

Or did we want to discuss and agree the path i686 took was the path we want any other demotion to take?

Since there was no progress in this ticket for 6 months, can we close this for now and possible re-open if there is something to discuss?

Metadata Update from @sgallagh:
- Issue close_status updated to: Insufficient data

6 years ago

Login to comment on this ticket.

Metadata