On 2019-11-14, Miro Hrončok <mhroncok@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I've asked whether it wouldn't be in fact much easier to keep the > default versions of our packages non-modular. [...] > Arguments were made that default modular streams are planned to > deliver the exact same experience as non-modular packages, yet it was > not said if it wouldn't be easier to just deliver non-modular packages > for default versions. > > Maybe it would be helpful to try to reformulate the question: > > **What are the benefits of default modular streams over non-modular > packages?** [...] > Considering we have 6 default modular streams, let me acknowledge that > for the maintainers who decided to deliver default modular streams > instead of non-modular packages, there clearly are some benefits. > While some of us might not understand them, let's not say there are > none. But even if there are clear benefits for the maintainers of > those modules, I'm asking about the benefits for everybody else. > You answered yourself: "default modular streams are planned to deliver the exact same experience as non-modular packages." If they provide the same experience, they provide the same set of benefits. Hence there cannot be any "benefits of default modular streams over non-modular packages". Q.E.D. If you want a disuccion, then you should not have stripped all modularity features and than ask what are the benefits of modularity without modularity. -- Petr _______________________________________________ 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
