On Fri, May 22, 2020 at 09:14:14PM -0400, Przemek Klosowski via devel wrote: > The scheme you are proposing is kind-of used for Java and Go, and is > sometimes known as 'vendoring' because it allows publishing software in > complete dependency bundles independent of anything else. It works as long > as the vendor is diligent about keeping up with it, but it just doesn't > scale and leads to a fragmented and redundant setup, with decaying software > all over teh place in those package bundles. Here the vendor is Fedora. Fedora would have to track all these old versions and activelly remove them by rebuilding them against the new dependencies. Users would not notice. But you are right that the possibility of vendoring makes a huge temptetion to upstreams to abuse and postponing porting to a new versions ad infinitum and that's the bitrotting you talk about, because distributions do not have a man power to overtake all the inactive upstreams. At the end, Fedora would remove the abandonded software. It's also the same reason, which the original poster noticed, why NixOS tries to only keep one version of a package in the system whenever possible. -- Petr
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ 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
