On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 03:54:18PM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > > It does seem like something like that should be possible. > This is possible already, due to a fedpkg update a couple months ago: > https://docs.pagure.org/fedpkg/releases/1.35.html Do we have policy around that? One reason one might want a module anyway is for the (future) EPEL case. Right now, EPEL has two problems: 1. As a maintainer, I don't necessarily want to commit to a 10+ package lifetime, and probably do not want to commit to RHEL-like backports. 2. Some people do though. So, as a user, it's unclear with the update policies and lifecycle for any given package. Theeeeoretically, modules should solve this, because I can declare "I'm building this for EPEL, but the lifecycle will be the same as in Fedora". (Or, for packages which have a 'slow' stream: "I'm planning on maintaining this version for three years in EPEL, and, hey, might as well also make that available on Fedora releases too.) -- 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
