Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> The ideal behavior would be for there to be UX that lets users know
> that if they enable one of these streams, it's
> unsupported/unsupportable (such as if they tried to use a
> stripped-down version of a build tool). The module streams have a
> "description" field that we should require to contain this
> information, as well as setting the "api" field to an empty list.
Wouldn't that preclude installing packages from the module as a user, or
even using the module as a build dependency of another module (which is the
point of the exercise)? If not, what is the point of the "api" field? I
thought an empty API would mean that all the packages in the module are
effectively private.
Kevin Kofler
_______________________________________________
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
