On Tue, 2020-01-07 at 10:36 +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote: > Dne 06. 01. 20 v 19:08 Nicolas Mailhot via devel napsal(a): > > Le 2020-01-06 19:05, Nicolas Mailhot a écrit : > > > > > Handling those checks is where the packaging toil is (that is, as long > > > as Fedora is a deployment project). It is not something the packaging > > > format makes harder. > > > > However, because our packaging format streamlines those checks, and > > forces to apply them, it is blamed by devs for the impedance mismatch > > between dev and deployment requirements. > > > > But, this mismatch is not caused by our packaging format. It is caused > > by devs taking shortcuts because their language packaging format lets > > them. > > > > Well said Nicolas. > > Embracing the "language-native packaging" and "git repos" is giving up > on what Fedora maintainers have always did and that is kicking forward > all the upstreams, because we force them to keep updating the > dependencies (or to maintain compatibility with old versions of > dependencies). Once we embrace "git repos" etc, we will lose our soul > IMO. There won't be any collaboration between upstream projects, which > was cultivated by distribution maintainers. Upstreams will sit in their > silos and bundle everything. Just recently I've read a discussion (IIRC on Hacker News) about an article about yet another mess due to NPM (I think this was for a change some licensing mess, not another malware) where someone suggested a radical new idea: "Lets have a crowd sourced set of packages that are known to have sane licenses, don't contain malware/CVEs and can work together!". Yeah, like, say a Linux distro such as Fedora ? Basically, it seems to me that the language specific package management systems are already creaking under load & display critical issues almost on a daily basis. Issues people with distro packaging background pointed out long ago, only to be ignored. So I think it really makes much more sense to continue with all the nice nice improvements we have been doing in RPM packaging, rather than throwing it all away and switching to a fundamentally inferior technology. > > Also, just today I had discussion if Ruby packages should be more Fedora > tailored or more upstream like and there is no right way which could > reasonably satisfy both worlds. > > E.g. if upstream package has Windows specific dependencies, it is kind > of natural to strip this dependency on Fedora. OTOH, it possibly breaks > a dependency resolving on other platforms, if the project was created > using Fedora packages. This is unfortunately the reason for devs to take > some shortcut, probably to go with upstream way, because if nothing > else, it is typically better documented. > > > > Vít > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 _______________________________________________ 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
