On Tue, Nov 12, 2019 at 11:10 AM Neal Gompa <ngompa13@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 12, 2019 at 11:03 AM Aleksandra Fedorova <alpha@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Again, no one forces you or any other packager to use modularity > > tooling right now. > > > > This is not true. Once content is modularized, things that were able > to depend on it in the normal form can no longer do so unless they too > modularize. This is true *currently*, but as I've been saying for months now: this is only true because we've not been allowed to land Ursa Prime (and, before that, Ursa Major) to allow us to have modules in the buildroot. That *finally* started to change with FESCo's decision yesterday. They gave us permission to put two reasonably-contained modules into the available buildroot to prove it out. > This is an important consequence that I think people > championing for modularity keep forgetting. Everything from how the > build system works to how DNF implements modularity makes it so that > modular and non-modular content do not have an even footing. If they > did, I think we'd have less problems. I think "even footing" is a poor choice of words, because it implies that one is "higher" than the other. It's true that things are built and managed *differently*. We've been trying to close that gap as much as possible. _______________________________________________ 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
