[CentOS-devel] CentOS x86-64 SIG naming

Fri Apr 21 16:00:06 UTC 2023
Amy Marrich <amy at redhat.com>

And that was the intent of the discussions. We would start the SiG with the
x86-64 work and then possibly rename it down the road to be more of an
umbrella for folks wanting to do similar things. The intent was never for
Florian to do anything but the x86 work.

If folks are good with the ISA SiG name we can just go with that from the
start.

Amy

*Amy Marrich*

She/Her/Hers

Principal Technical Marketing Manager - Cloud Platforms

Red Hat, Inc <https://www.redhat.com/>

amy at redhat.com

Mobile: 954-818-0514

Slack:  amarrich

IRC: spotz
<https://www.redhat.com/>


On Fri, Apr 21, 2023 at 9:51 AM Patrick Riehecky via CentOS-devel <
centos-devel at centos.org> wrote:

> On Fri, 2023-04-21 at 16:14 +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> > During the board meeting, the naming issue was re-raised; “x86 SIG”
> > just
> > isn't that great.  So I'd like to propose “x86-64 SIG” instead, with
> > a
> > hyphen.  We use “x86_64” in the RPM architecture name and configure
> > triplets, but only because we must, as “-” is consindered a separator
> > in
> > these contexts.  The official vendor-neutral architecture name is
> > x86-64.
> >
> > During the meeting, I was under the impression that the board was
> > leaning towards a narrow scope, but that is not quite what the posted
> > minutes reflect.  Per Fabian's announcement, we have at least a bit
> > of
> > wiggle room for non-x86 ISA experiments in CBS (ThunderX2 has LSE
> > atomics support).  Personally, I'm not interested in such experiments
> > at
> > this time, though.  But we could call the SIG “ISA SIG” to keep open
> > the
> > possibility for non-x86 work, if that's what people want.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Florian
>
> Perhaps setting up "working groups" within the SIG would help clarify
> the current scope of work?
>
> An ISA SIG with an x86-64 working group would clarify that no work is
> currently focused on any other arches, but leave open a door if other
> folks wanted to form some sort of s390x working group - but they'd be
> on their own?
>
> Pat
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS-devel mailing list
> CentOS-devel at centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20230421/db0c9660/attachment-0002.html>