On 5/1/2013 23:36, Dan Cross wrote:
I personally don't care for the idea of focusing on one architecture, because having more is often a forcing function to keep the code tidy and portable and avoid unnecessary hardware dependencies.
I think everyone agrees with you on this point.
But if that'sthe case, make it multiple actively supported and developed architectures; maybe some sort of ARM or MIPS based port would be both good and very practical?
There is a lot of interest in having an ARM64 port. It seems like all none of the active developers have time to work on this though. I believe the DragonFly project would embrace an individual that makes a serious attempt at a port, and he/she would be supported during the process. Any volunteers?
Putting a lot of effort into i386 for more than a few more years is going to be a dead end and feels like misplacing resources that could be better applied towards pushing the system forward in other dimensions. So I'm for the idea of setting a sunset date for i386, for what it's worth (which is approximately nothing :-)).
Thanks for your input! Supporting multiple architectures is the right idea, and hopefully those architectures that have a bright future.
John
