On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 02:30:20PM +0000, Joe Orton wrote: > On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 12:44:52PM +0100, Miro Hroncok wrote: > > Where is the end-user benefit with the modular default stream? I don't see > > it either, sorry. > > It's not clear to me how those examples are related to my argument, > which I could summarize as: > > a) multiple module streams have a benefit to users, and > b) default streams have a benefit to package owners. Hi Joe, this thread is looking for details about a very specific question: What are the benefits of default modular streams over non-modular packages? (and as clarified in text: for everybody else, not the maintainers of those modules). We also want to be as concrete as possible, to avoid getting mired in speculation. If I understood your argument, you are saying that default module streams make it easier for the owners of those modules to deliver rpms (as compared to providing non-modular rpms), and that this indirectly benefits users because they get those rpms faster and will less maintainer effort. Did I get this right? If there's some other benefit, please describe a specific scenario. Zbyszek _______________________________________________ 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
