On 17 May 2018 at 18:11, Matthew Miller <mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 04:36:17PM -0400, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: >> I have been worried about a negative feedback loop here on packagers. >> This is a new technology and packagers aren't usually people who care >> about EPEL. Having them to deal with multiple OS's they don't use >> makes it more likely they don't want to put stuff in modules in the >> first place. I would prefer to be looser on the uptake of modules to >> get people comfortable with them in Fedora first. I also don't expect >> a large demand for modules in EPIC. > > Modules solve two problems for EPIC: > > First, since each module has a lifecycle definition, they make it easy > to maintain packages for EPIC without the 10-year commitment (or, > indeed, any more commitment then the packager makes in Fedora). And > that works both ways: as a consumer, I can know up front what lifecycle > I can (at least nominally) expect from a given module stream. > > Second, I *do* think there are a lot of cases where different EPIC > users will want different versions. The Django module we have in Fedora > now would be immediately useful. > > I do also worry about the possible negative feedback loop. I suggest we > start _building_ for EL by default but not tagging into the repo. Make > _that_ opt-in. > > First, I am not disagreeing with what you are saying. I wrote the proposal as things that are inside EPEL's circle of influence with most of the other items going to take a LOT of release engineering work to accomplish. I am also writing it for a risk averse consumer base who want assurances that they can get old stuff even if it is past its sell by date and that it won't eat their children if they fat-finger a command. If Fedora wants to build it across all platforms, I don't have a problem with it.. I just didn't see it as inside of what we influenced. >> >> Extra Packages Inter Community. >> > Extra Packages for Impassioned Community? >> > Extra Packages Included by Community? >> > Extra Packages Introduced by Community? >> > Extra Packages Including Community? >> > Extra Packages for Innnnnterprise Community? (Or "EPEC"?) I think with our horrible history of naming this project EPEC is what we go with. I just want the new logo not to look like a horse's butt with tail. [I know that isn't what it was meant to be.. it is a sail on a boat.. but once someone describes it like that.. its like a Tyranosaurus Rex fighting a Triceratops but not as fun] >> Extra Packages for Introverted Communities > > Extroverted Packages for Introverted Communities! > > -- > Matthew Miller > <mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Fedora Project Leader > _______________________________________________ > epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/message/ZF72FFOWREWSOHPA7MPJL74ZQNZZQMZX/ -- Stephen J Smoogen. _______________________________________________ epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/message/TIFMZGH5QVXYW5HCKV5GJEEYZ5T2T2V3/
