On 11/09/2013 08:26 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Fri, Nov 08, 2013 at 03:21:04PM -0500, Matthias Clasen wrote:
Hey, I read your minutes, and discussed some of my thoughts on this with
my workstation wg peers. Basically, I think that defining a 'base' as a
particular set of packages (minimal install, or some variant thereof)
does not really provide us what we need to build one or more products.'
What we really need as a base is a definition of the apis that are
guaranteed to be stable and that the products and applications can rely
on. Packages can to some extent serve as a proxy for that, but they are
really just an implementation detail of how the product is put
together.
+1 to this. In fact, I think we'll *need* to do it this way in order to be
able to innovate at both layers.
I absolutely like the idea and i think we brought that up during our
meeting on Friday actually and were all more or less in favor of it.
In order to get there though the Base team will need very detailed input
from the other WGs so that we can then find the smallest common
denominator of a common stable API and/or ABI that Base will then
provide for any given release for all products.
Thanks & regards, Phil
--
Philipp Knirsch | Tel.: +49-711-96437-470
Manager Core Services | Fax.: +49-711-96437-111
Red Hat GmbH | Email: Phil Knirsch <pknirsch@xxxxxxxxxx>
Wankelstrasse 5 | Web: http://www.redhat.com/
D-70563 Stuttgart, Germany
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
