On Mon, Oct 14, 2019 at 11:44:46PM +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote: > The net result of this proposed Change for the end user is still the same as > the status quo: They have to use modules whether they want to or not, the > choice is taken away from them. And while the default stream approach tries > to hide Modularity from the users (and with this proposed Change, also from > the packagers of dependent packages), the abstraction is leaky, as > evidenced, e.g., by the libgit2 upgrade blocker. Yup, it is certainly not perfect and we'll have to work through those kinds of issues carefully as Stephen & others are doing. I am very confident in trusting Fedora developers to make sensible choices for our users, though - including whether we should make packages module-only. As package maintainers we all make technical decisions which have significant impact on our users every day - whether that's in the choice of defaults, choice of build flags, or whatever. Honestly delivering as modules-vs-non-modules is a completely trivial issue compared to most of the stuff I spend time on. If "yum install X" still works most people just don't care about the RPM/dnf/repo mechanics behind that. If you don't want to ship any of your packages as modules I think that's great and you should continue doing that. On the other hand, I want to move a bunch of my packages to module-only because I think I can do a better job serving Fedora users that way. Regards, Joe _______________________________________________ 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
