On 05. 08. 20 21:36, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
FESCo has requested that I submit the module policy once more to the
Fedora development list for discussion. Feedback is welcome.
== Requirements for Default Streams
* Default streams are not permitted in Fedora or EPEL 8. Fedora ELN
permits defaults streams that adhere to the policy below.
Since this has been discussed at lengths at FESCo and this is the first time it
has been brought here (thanks for doing it, Stephen), let me summarize my
concerns with allowing default modular streams in ELN.
I would like to know if my concerns are valid or if I am just biased. Sorry for
the long email.
Fedora has experimented with default modular streams for several releases and we
seemed to be at an agreement that the experiment has failed:
See https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2406 which includes links to relevant previous
discussions on the topic. Admitting that default modular streams are bad took as
nearly two years, despite a few loud and persistent individuals pointing it out
since the beginning.
While I understand the original idea behind the concept of default modular
streams concept, shipping defaults via non-modular content has been proven
superior to default modular streams -- it has been proven that default modular
streams cannot be better than nonmodular defaults and that they can only try to
be as good as them, while they are currently technologically failing to do that:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/thread/D2LQ6C6FHDS2LMKPDGCLFJDNHAPA6Q2B/
The currently proposed modularity objective for Fedora admits that this won't be
fixed until ta least Fedora 35 and later:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/thread/RF4GUWFIDIASBDKS2RUVDHTSAWCMCWL4/
The current modularity tech-lead strongly discourages default modular streams:
https://pagure.io/fedora-docs/modularity/pull-request/83#comment-122310
https://pagure.io/fedora-docs/modularity/pull-request/83#comment-122502
Yet despite all this, we got a proposal to allow default modular streams in ELN.
The messaging about this proposal suggests that later, default modular streams
might be proposed for Fedora as well.
"""At present, these rules will apply only to Fedora ELN, but are written in
such a way as to be reusable for Fedora and EPEL in the future through another
Change Proposal.""" -- https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ModularPolicy
Fedora has decided that default modular streams are no-go. While I admit that
such a decision can be reverted at any time based on significant changes in the
technology, such changes have not happened and are not planned. Yet strong
supporters of default modular streams try to allow them again and again, despite
the enormous amount of feedback they've received including the feedback from the
current modularity team and tech lead.
I sincerely don't understand the RHEL's need for default modular streams, but
when I tried to query the motivation behind this, the answers haven't made it
any better:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/thread/YIUXL2AWY3GKITU4TBUSKL2IUHDUPB26/
The idea that we let the maintainers decide how they want to ship the default
content is exactly what failed in Fedora in the first place. But if RHEL people
feel strongly that we need default modular steams to succeed, so be it. What I
don't understand is why do we need this in Fedora (ELN). It boils down to this:
Is ELN part of Fedora and should it follow Fedora's feedback and Fedora's
opinions, or is it a RHEL project executed in the open, with decisions made
behind closed doors?
I've heard several times that we need to have default modular streams in Fedora
ELN to have a place to test them. In my opinion, we had this place, it was in
Fedora, we have tested them and they failed. Hence I don't understand what's
more there to test.
OTOH, why don't just let the ELN SIG do this if it doesn't affect "Fedora
proper"? Because I think it does. Since the beginning of the ELN project, it has
been said that it ships Fedora rawhide content, built differently. Yet if we
ship the default modular streams content in Fedora ELN and the nonmodular
defaults in Fedora Rawhide, suddenly we ship different things, unless we have
technical means to ensure the content is synchronized.
When the ELN proposal was discussed, several package maintainers (both from
Fedora and RHEL) proposed to have an eln branch. It received a big NO because
the content would diverge and keeping it in sync would be (close to) impossible.
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/message/44MCFHOFORTPNJFGK6JJ6YMAHFUT7QG3/
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/message/WRJNM7I5TFQ5TEBOUKKH757K5ME3I47F/
..and many times more...
Fedora ELN should not be a fork. Yet (some of the) default content of Fedora ELN
would be built from modules, which packages built from different branches.
Has the objective been changed? Is having separate branches for Fedora and
Fedora ELN no longer a big NO? What changed?
I am worried about the divergence between Fedora and Fedora ELN. I am worried
about certain maintainers only maintaining their modules without upgrading
packages in rawhide -- and a need of a large volunteer-driven effort to backport
improvements and fixes from modules to nonmodular packages: From Fedora ELN to
Fedora. This seems wrong to me, as I've always considered Fedora to be the
upstream of RHEL (and by extension of Fedora ELN) rather than downstream.
When I expressed this concern in the "RHEL 9 and modularity" thread, the
discussion went nowhere:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/message/PQX75DGRIICQLG5KBOY4HTOFFYZVWP6K/
(and replies)
I believe that allowing default modular streams in any Fedora project is a bad
thing to do before the technology sees large design-level changes. I believe
that RHEL completely ignoring Fedora's feedback is a very sad thing to happen. I
believe that having default modular streams in ELN will negatively affect
general Fedora packagers. But I realize that this is juts one person's opinion.
At FESCo, I try to represent the opinion of Fedora package maintainers, not just
my own. Hence I am sharing my concerns here to hear feedback from others.
--
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
