On Tue, Oct 09, 2018 at 06:07:44PM -0600, Al Stone wrote: > -- And the one question I have to add on to Christopher's wonderful > list: I have a package where upstream releases about once a month, > and each new release must by definition be backwards compatible > (acpica-tools, specifically). I can think of no scenario where a > module provides value to me or end-users; in fact, using anything > other than the most recent causes problems. Do I have to create and > maintain a module for this package anyway? Or are the defaults > robust enough that a package can remain a package without touching > modularity at all? The answer to this is completely unclear to me -- > what I've read seems to imply that I must create a module definition > regardless. This actually seems like the ideal case for a single stream -- instead of maintaining rawhide, f29, f28, epel7, you'd just maintain "latest", and that would get build into all of these releases simultaneously. -- Matthew Miller <mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Fedora Project Leader _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to 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/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
