Am 14.04.2022 um 14:05 schrieb Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
<johannbg(a)gmail.com>:
On 14.4.2022 11:53, Peter Boy wrote:
>
>> Am 14.04.2022 um 12:57 schrieb Jóhann B. Guðmundsson <johannbg(a)gmail.com>:
>>
>> For example EU has regulation that requires vendors to have spare parts available
for 7–10 years after date of manufacturing so it makes sense for the project to support hw
no longer than a decade from the date of it's manufacturing. ( which makes the oldest
hw being support being manufactured in 2012 ) and every process,workflows and decision
being bound by that.
>>
>> Is Fedora an distribution that does not revert but always transforms, rolls out
and moves forward or is it an distribution that is stuck in the past ( from a software and
hardware point of view )?
> Sorry, you simple didn’t get the point. It is not just about hardware. Some Cloud
providers doesn’t support UEFI boot at the moment - so said various voices from Cloud WG.
And some data center insist ob BIOS boot because of whatever, presumably management
infrastructure. So, the hardware does or does not support UEFI, doesn’t matter in these
cases.
So you are saying that 3rd party vendors ( cloud providers ) now dictate and decide the
direction of the project?
Nobody dictates anything. The provider has its good reasons, whatever it is. And Fedora
has its own reasons. As I said, it’s just our decision: how many users do we want to leave
behind. Or can we think of a good solution and find the strength to organize it so that we
don't lose any users or as few as possible. It's our problem, not anyone
else's.
Or: how much do we care about our users? And how connected do we feel to our users?