On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 09:29:52AM -0400, Kaleb Keithley wrote: > On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 7:35 AM Daniel P. Berrangé <berrange@xxxxxxxxxx> > wrote: > > > The ability to have multiple different builds of the same software which > > users can choose between, sounds alot like the use case for modularity. > > Abusing Epoch to try to address this kind of situation feels like a pretty > > undesirable approach, as this problem with suddenly clashing Epochs will > > illustrate. > > > > If only there had been modularity before f29 that might have been > reasonable a reasonable claim, IMO. Sure, in the past it wasn't possible, but I think it is a more viable long term approach to the general scenerio. > But it wasn't. My issue is that there's no way to fix things when a > mistake is made. > > Perhaps I misunderstand the purpose of rawhide. I appreciate that "we" try > to _not_ break things in rawhide, but when they do, there should be a way > to fix them. Well technically Fedora rawhide isn't actually broken by the epoch change. All that's broken is a 3rd party's assumption that their Epoch setting is greater than Fedora's. Assuming Ceph want to keep using Epoch in this way, upstream can simply bump their Epoch again to be greater than Fedora's new Epoch. Regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :| _______________________________________________ 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
