<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<span style="font-size:11pt; font-family:Helvetica, Arial"></span>Le
10/01/2024 à 23:57, Mike Rochefort via CentOS-devel a écrit :<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:e8b9f0e6-4bb5-4915-ab3b-1e44cbb563c6@omenos.dev">On
1/10/24 5:43 PM, Jean-Marc Liger wrote: <br>
<blockquote type="cite">I'm sure that keeping x86-64-v2 baseline
support will be an interesting <br>
additional value provided by freeloading rebuilders. <br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Can we hold ourselves to a higher standard than this, please? <br>
</blockquote>
<p><span class="HwtZe" lang="en"><span class="jCAhz ChMk0b"><span
class="ryNqvb">The brutal truth is a higher standard, it
helps saving time and money by focusing on what is
essential, like what you bring in your additional comment
below<br>
</span></span></span></p>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:e8b9f0e6-4bb5-4915-ab3b-1e44cbb563c6@omenos.dev"> <br>
If the proposed change go through and invalidates scores of
non-compliant hardware, I think it would be interesting to see if
any community SIGs or downstream distributions make an attempt at
this. Whether its trying to support them via just not bumping up
from x86_64-v2 or via a hwcaps packaging method, etc. <br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>