Le 2019-12-02 10:49, Igor Gnatenko a écrit :
On Mon, Dec 2, 2019 at 8:58 AM Nicolas Mailhot via devel
<devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Le 2019-12-02 07:47, Igor Gnatenko a écrit :
> Hi Neal,
>
> On Sat, Nov 30, 2019 at 11:58 PM Neal Gompa <ngompa13@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> I think we need to recognize that we've done some poor optimization
>> for the majority of packager workflows. Even if we consider modules,
>> the vast majority of components will never be modularized. Moreover,
>> we already know that the overwhelming majority of specs are managed
>> identically across branches.
>
> Yeah, indeed. I think this (optimization of packager workflows) was
> never an explicit goal of people working on Modularity.
And for that reason alone, it should have been sent directly back to
the drawing board.
It really depends on a goal.
It does not. Unless the tooling gets fully autonomous, it won’t work
without human operators (tooling users ie packagers), so making operator
life easier (or at least not worse) is a requisite for adoption.
The RH side can force employees to use new tooling because it’s the
company choice. The Fedora community side has to make the new tooling
worth the contributor’s time.
Regards,
--
Nicolas Mailhot
_______________________________________________
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
