Hi, Miro, On Thu, Apr 2, 2020 at 6:56 PM Miro Hrončok <mhroncok@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 31. 03. 20 17:31, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > > I sent out the V2 version of the Change on Friday and then promptly > > managed to injure myself and be away from email until today. I've read > > through the email threads again this morning and I decided that, > > rather than try to address them one by one, I'd try again with a V3 > > that hopefully answers some of the repeated questions and concerns on > > that list. > > > > Please see the newly-updated > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ELN_Buildroot_and_Compose > > for more details[1]. > > > > > > [1] https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=Changes%2FELN_Buildroot_and_Compose&type=revision&diff=569904&oldid=569809 > > A vote has been initiated at FESCo issue tracker: > > https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2365 > > I am reposing my reply here: > > > The change proposal received overly negative feedback by the packager community > as represented both by RHEL¹ and non-RHEL maintainers. Despite being reworked > several times, none of this feedback was reflected in the proposal, only new > reasons why this is going to be done the original way were added. It seems that > feedback is collected not to find the best technical solution, but rather to > find ways to justify a solution that's already decided. > > Key questions in the *Detailed Description* remain "out of scope of ELN" or not > answered clearly. The proposal should address the impact on all major packaging > styles, and while one side of the spectrum (packagers preferring single-spec > with conditionals) is covered, there are very few concrete details on the other > (packagers interested in simple spec files or completely uninterested in RHEL). > The affected packagers are concerned that the current proposal does not in fact > benefit Fedora (to an extent that would justify the disruptions), but rather > addresses mainly a downstream RHEL concern using Fedora's resources. > > While benefiting the entire Fedora/RHEL/CentOS/EPEL ecosystem is certainly a > good goal, I believe that doing this in a way that alienates a significant part > of our packagers is a disservice to Fedora. The concerned packagers believe that > Fedora is (and should remain) the upstream for RHEL, not RHEL itself. This might > be shifting us to the undesirable mindset that Fedora is only a test bed for > RHEL or a RHEL alpha version. I literally addressed this part three times already here on the mailing list. And three times I got ignored, with someone posting the same concern again. If you'd like to have a conversation, please listen to the replies you get. I'll reiterate again: ELN is a tool to develop Fedora. Conditionals for ELN packages are going to be applied in those places where it makes sense and where it is approved by the Fedora packager. Yes, we believe that adding the flexibility in Fedora deptrees and feature choices is beneficial to Fedora. It is Fedora flexibility, which can then be used by downstream, whatever the downstream would be. We are not going to enforce this vision, but we'd like to work with people who share it, to test if this can actually work. We discard branching as the part of the ELN proposal, exactly because of the concern that Fedora infrastructure is going to be used by downstream maintainers to develop downstream packages. We DO NOT want that. That's why we say: if Fedora packager and downstream can not come up with the common solution on how to incorporate downstream changes in Fedora Rawhide, then downstream work can not and should not happen in Fedora (and as ELN is Fedora, it should not happen in ELN either). Branching and dist git sync to downstream can and will happen, but on downstream terms and on downstream infrastructure. This work doesn't belong to Fedora, and therefore doesn't need to be discussed here in this change proposal. Now you blame us for thing which we haven't proposed. And it is hard to have a proper conversation about technical details, when the goal of the effort is repeatedly misunderstood and misinterpreted. > For me this feels like a step back to the [discontinued Fedora > Core](https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-January/msg00091.html), > where the packages that were included in RHEL could only be maintained by their > RHEL maintainers. Fedora relies on the contributions of non-RHEL developers — > and those often have little interest in downstream work. If we alienate the > community contributors, it will ultimately lead to a worse RHEL down the road. > > For the stated reasons I am *-1 for this change in its current form*. > > As said on the mailing list, I'd appreciate if you take the feedback provided by > the packagers more seriously and adjust the proposal accordingly. > > As a side note, I'd like to continue the discussion on the mailing list, as I > believe there's still plenty to discuss. That's why I'll also post this text > there, so you can quote-reply. > > ------- > > ¹ For any interested Red Hatters reading this: Apart form the feedback received > on the devel mailing list, I discussed this internally with my Red Hat team, > Python-maint .The whole team shares my concerns, as do other members of Core > Services. > > -- > Miro Hrončok > -- > Phone: +420777974800 > IRC: mhroncok > _______________________________________________ > 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 -- Aleksandra Fedorova bookwar _______________________________________________ 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
