On Sun, Oct 20, 2019 at 09:07:27AM +0000, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > Because this keeps coming up, we talked about this at the Fedora Council > > meeting today. Our goals for modularity are: > > 2. Those alternate streams should be able to have different lifecycles. > > Hmm, it sounds like the Council hasn't taken into account the constraints > on lifecycle of modules that we have slowly discovered during the last > two years, constraints that are now part of FESCo-approved policy. > > Essentially, modules in Fedora are only allowed to EOL at EOL of Fedora > release. And to preserve stability for users, a.k.a. following the Update > Policy, modules should only change to new major version at Fedora > releases. This is exactly the same as for "normal" rpms. This seems appropriate for default steams, but modules should be able to have alternate, opt-in streams which either a) update on a rolling or other cadence or b) choose to keep building the older version across the release boundary. The tooling should make this clear to the users. > The lifecycle of modules in Fedora must be the same as lifecycle of > Fedora releases, so no "different lifecycle" is possible. > > > 1. Users should have alternate streams of software available. > > 3. Packaging an individual stream for multiple outputs should be easier > > than before. > > Those *are* useful goals, but they should not be tied to specific technology, > we should only care about the end-result. Yes, that's true from a Council point of view. However, I also have a pretty strong bias towards people who showed up to do the work, and the decisions they've made. That doesn't mean we're stuck and can't adjust -- in fact, adjusting as we've gone along is a lot of why we're where we are now. But unless someone shows up with people-power and funding to do it, I take kind of a skeptical view of proposals to start a whole new approach from scratch. > Thus, please replace "Our goals for modularity are" with "What we hope > to achieve with modularity" or even "Our goal is for users to be able to". I don't really see a meaningful difference there. -- 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
