On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 at 08:13:17PM +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote: > To quote you from the other ongoing thread: "The default stream for a > package shouldn't be updated in disruptive ways in shipped releases" > If that's the case, then what *is* the benefit of abandoning the > non-modular version of packages, if default streams need to basically > be maintained separately for different branches anyway? 🤔 To me, most packages would benefit from having two streams: fast and slow. That's the essential problem I want solved anyway. (Maybe with CentOS Streams: fast, slow, very slow.) The "slow" version would be updated on a careful cadence with big updates aligned with release boundaries. The fast version would be rolling latest. And for applications, you can pick which you want. -- 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://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
