On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 10:49:20AM -0400, Owen Taylor wrote: > To what extent do we want to encourage "collections of stuff" modules? > > Numerically, most modules will likely to be designed to be installed as > containers or flatpaks because that's how we handle conflicting dependencies. > If you leave those modules out, then you really have the constraint that > every package has to be in no more than one module. We can't have > "Matthew's System Tools" and "Owen's System Tools" that are independently > curated, because they can't be enabled on the same system. Well, we *can*. The question is whether we *should*. :) I'm kind of on the "we shouldn't" side, but I could be convinced. My intention is for anything that is in the System Tools module which gets its own more focused module to be moved out. > So my expectation is that the number of "collections modules" that have > no strong connection to a particular upstream release process will be > small and well defined - say Platform, Runtime, System Tools, and a few more. > As such, I think it *would* be reasonable to say that they all > are versioned at the same tempo and even keep the F<N> stream naming. Langdon? Rebuttal? :) > Hmmm, I see a couple of issues: > > * If we have 'apache' with a stream of 2.4 and 'GNOME Desktop' with a > stream of 3.24, we can't have the stream name be the main way we > convey EOL information. So then it's just confusing that for *some* > modules the EOL is duplicated in the stream name. > > * The ability to change the EOL for a stream is quite likely useful - > to decide it will have a longer support lifetime than originally > planned. It would be even more confusing to have *incorrect* EOL's > as the stream name. > > * Aren't people in July 2018 going to think f1806 is the current stream, > not a two-year old stream? Yeah that last one is pretty bad. I think all of this argues for a real first-class EOL metadata item. > If we need arbitrary stream names that are consistent across Fedora, I think > release dates would be a lot clearer than EOL dates - EOL dates seem more > clever than useful. Okay, I'm convinced, as long as we can get lifecycle/EOL as a first-class metadata item. -- Matthew Miller <mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Fedora Project Leader _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
