On 29.11.22 10:44, Dominique Leuenberger / DimStar wrote:
The openQA test results are, in most cases, expected to be the same. Yet, somebody has to do the work to review the failures and tag them with the corresponding bug reports (most frequently probably copying them from the STandard Tumbleweed port). Doing this on 2 extra ports is definitively more work than not doing this. And the occasional (albeit rare) case of something really being specific to x86-64-v1 (and i586, as announced, this won't be part of Tumbleweed anymore) will need to be analyzed and fixed.
Okay, I understand, openQA and OBS needs additional resources for each repository. As a compromise, openQA could be only enabled for the hardware version with the most users (probably v2). The v1 users will then see problems a little more often.
I hope this is not news for you - but nothing comes for free in this world. At least some heartbeets and sweat-pearls need to be invested in everything. The expectation that 'somebody is doing it' only works until there is nobody else volunteering todo the work.
If I am affected as a developer or administrator depends on the fact, which would be the minimum supported version. All my machines support at least v2, but only 50% support v3. Probably some of the v2 machines will be exchanged in the next years. My next developer machine will the v4. I am more concerned about my customers. Some of them use SLES, but most prefer Windows servers. They use old versions of SLES and Windows and relatively old server hardware. Already now it is difficult to persuade customers to upgrade their SLES mayor version e.g. to get more recent database server versions. If they hear, that the next SLES will not support their old hardware, they will probably use SLES 11 until EOL and then move everything to Windows server. You said, nothing comes for free. But loosing SLES customers is also problem. Greetings, Björn