Skip to main content
fixed formatting; minor copyediting; reorganized info for clarity
Source Link
V2Blast
  • 101
  • 3
  • 18
  • 31

I asked aboutsuggested the removal of the [x86] and [x86-64] tags from Intel Collective here: Intel collective owns [x86] and [x86-64].
Peter's answer explains the issue with the current scope of the Intel collective.

As I see your point, it is non-negotiable to significantly reduce the traffic of the Intel Collective.

Can insteadyou consider splitting the Intel Collective into two collectives be consideredinstead?

Peter's answer explains the issue with the current scope of Intel collective.

I understand that it could be non-negotiable eitheras well. But with its current scope, it doesn't meet fundamental to the ideation of Collectives.

I asked about removal of [x86] and [x86-64] tags from Intel Collective: Intel collective owns [x86] and [x86-64].

As I see your point, it is non-negotiable to significantly reduce the traffic of Intel Collective.

Can instead splitting Intel Collective into two collectives be considered?

Peter's answer explains the issue with the current scope of Intel collective.

I understand it could be non-negotiable either. But with current scope it doesn't meet fundamental to the ideation of Collectives.

I suggested the removal of the and tags from Intel Collective here: Intel collective owns [x86] and [x86-64].
Peter's answer explains the issue with the current scope of the Intel collective.

As I see your point, it is non-negotiable to significantly reduce the traffic of the Intel Collective.

Can you consider splitting the Intel Collective into two collectives instead?

I understand that it could be non-negotiable as well. But with its current scope, it doesn't meet fundamental to the ideation of Collectives.

Source Link
Alex Guteniev
  • 13.4k
  • 1
  • 14
  • 21

I asked about removal of [x86] and [x86-64] tags from Intel Collective: Intel collective owns [x86] and [x86-64].

As I see your point, it is non-negotiable to significantly reduce the traffic of Intel Collective.

Can instead splitting Intel Collective into two collectives be considered?

Peter's answer explains the issue with the current scope of Intel collective.

I understand it could be non-negotiable either. But with current scope it doesn't meet fundamental to the ideation of Collectives.