(no commit message)
[ikiwiki.git] / i386_phaseout_discussion / index.mdwn
CommitLineData
fc9c30dd 1## Phasing out i386 Support in Dragonfly - Discussion
2
3On IRC a discussion started if - and how - i386 support in DragonFly BSD should be phased out in the next e.g. 2 years.
4This page should serve as a central point to note down arguments, pro/cons etc in a structured and organized way to prevent the discussion to repeat over and over again using the same point, etc.
5
6Points noted down here can be totally subjective and be posted anonymously - but I would like to suggest that you mark them with you name or irc nick. They should be formulated concise and as short as possbile (no poetry please).
7
8lentferj
9
10
11
12
13### Pros and Cons on removing i386
14
15 * #### Pros
b53b2174 16 * ...
fc9c30dd 17
18 * #### Cons
26c7a80d 19 * "I am using it", and there are lots of non-64bit-only features I used with each new release (lentferj)
fc9c30dd 20
21
c73a7f03 22### Pros and Cons on turning 3.4-i386 into a bug-fix-only release with LTS for a defined period of time (e.g. 2 years), but no more feature updates
fc9c30dd 23
24
25 * #### Pros
26 * ...
27
28 * #### Cons
d8b91c5d 29 * i386 user base might still be pretty big (has to be evaluated) and would be curtained off also from none-64bit specific improvments (lentferj)
fc9c30dd 30
31
32
c73a7f03 33### Pros and Cons on keeping i386 alive in the same way as it is now (e.g. there will be a i386-3.6 release, etc), but announcing i386 EOL for end of 20xx (e.g. 2014).
fc9c30dd 34
35 * #### Pros
36 * ...
37
38 * #### Cons
39 * ...
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48