On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 11:07:10AM +0200, Igor Gnatenko wrote:
> > > How do the proposals I've mentioned not fulfill the goals?
> > Are you proposing to _do_ those things, or proposing that someone else
> > oughta?
> I agree with Lukas that this is unfair. As we talked on the Flock,
> that means only people working @ RH can do such things since they have
> dedicated time.
Okay, I hear you.
Randy, I'm sorry, and it was unfair to assume you were not making these
comments with constructive intent. And I certainly don't mean that feedback
or contribution should in any way be limited to people lucky enough to get
to do this full time. That's not how I want Fedora to be and I'm sorry for
implying it.
That said, it's hard to read "I see it as a solved problem and I don't
understand why we are trying to solve it again" as ... helpful. Clearly it's
not a solved problem in Fedora; we're not doing all this work just to make
people's lives harder or (as that same post seems to imply) to reinvent the
wheel.
A suggestion like "we should just use slots like Gentoo has" is not really a
useful proposal. It's a 10,000-foot statement, and as we definitely know,
the actual work is in the details. That's what I really meant, not that I
expect Randy to do all of that actual work.
> But I would definitely like to do some work in this regard, however, I
> can't find full list of things we would like to achieve.
Definitely.
This is from the council meeting a few weeks ago:
Our goals for modularity are:
1. Users should have alternate streams of software available.
2. Those alternate streams should be able to have different lifecycles.
3. Packaging an individual stream for multiple outputs should be easier
than before.
The Gentoo slots mechanism says "This is useful for libraries which may have
changed interfaces between versions — for example, the gtk+ package can
install both versions 2.24 and 3.6 in parallel." This is fine. We already
have a mechanism for installing simultaneous versions of packages in
parallel with nameversion munging. I happen to think that what we do is
icky, and maybe bringing the Gentoo approach to RPM would be helpful.
But it doesn't really address the above things at all. It's just another
(possible) building block.
[Igor, I'm going to address a couple of your specific questions in another
sub-thread.]
--
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
