On Mon, 2019-10-07 at 14:59 -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 2:56 PM Simo Sorce <simo@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > I have to ask, > > given containers are so popular and can deal with any dependency > > without conflicting with system installed binaries, should we really > > continue with this very complicated modular design ? > > > > Shouldn't we go back to have default packages and then defer to > > "containers" for applications (and their dependencies) that need to > > deviate from system defaults for any reason ? > > > > And where is the software for those containers coming from? Some > container registry like Docker Hub? One of the main points of > Modularity is to provide a trusted source of software to install into > containers. We can definitely build it as part of Fedora, that doesn't mean we need to expose regular users to "modularity". It would be a build artifact that only people building the "fedora containers" need to deal with. If you see how flatpaks are done that comes close. There is a flatpack runtime that can be reused by multiple containers, but also on the same machine you can be using multiple runtimes if different applications pull in different runtimes. In all cases what is in the runtime, how it is built and how it end on your machine are transparent to the user, but clearly visibile if you *want* to and also clearly under the control of the container provider. Simo. -- Simo Sorce RHEL Crypto Team Red Hat, Inc _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
