Kubuntu PowerPC builds

[Scott Kitterman]

Harald Sitter <sitter.harald at gmail.com> wrote:
>On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 2:29 PM, Ho Wan Chan <smartboyhw at gmail.com>
>wrote:
>> 2013/8/1 Harald Sitter <apachelogger at ubuntu.com>:
>> If you don't care, why should we have it then?
>
>If we don't spend time on it and it is tested, why should we not have
>it?
>
>>>> Don't forget, we aren't exactly Lubuntu, who wants to support every
>>>> single old computer.
>>>> Alternate images are what Lubuntu still wants while we have already
>dropped it.
>>>> Why should we drop alternate images if we can properly test it, as
>in
>>>> coherence to our attitude?
>>>
>>> We didn't test them, that's why alternate was dropped.
>> Think about this. We only have 1 tester for PowerPC. How many testers
>> do we have for i386 and amd64?
>
>1.5. And that 1.5 testers were kubuntu developers. Compared to ppc
>which had 1 who was not a kubuntu developer.
>
>> Alternate images  can have a lot of
>> testers. PowerPC will have problems.
>
>Since no one wanted to test alternate images despite them being easy
>to test but one person tests ppc despite being hard to test, doesn't
>that say something about ppc?
>
>>>
>>>> So, what are the pros and cons of removing PowerPC image builds?
>>>>
>>>> Pros:
>>>>
>>>> Save testing time on PowerPC builds (and no need to wait for it at
>all
>>>> before we can release betas or final releases)
>>>
>>> AFAIK we'd still have to wait for the other flavors and I don't
>think
>>> we ever delayed a release for considerable amount of time because an
>>> architecture that is not x86 based wasn't tested.
>> Well, the only flavour who still supports PowerPC except us is
>> Lubuntu, and that's because they really want to support PowerPC, and
>> they actually spend time contacting release teams and testing even
>the
>> dailies. Not in our case.
>
>What's the pro then?
>
>>>> Don't have to rely on other testers
>>>
>>> If we are spending time testing while relying on other testers to
>test
>>> then something went terribly wrong...
>>>
>> I am sure once we have to contact them since we aren't testing.
>
>'ping, testing plz' is a substantial time investment.

+1

Scott K