On 23/10/20 13:46 -0400, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 1:07 PM Clement Verna <cverna@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Fri, 23 Oct 2020 at 17:20, Miro Hrončok <mhroncok@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 10/23/20 2:45 PM, Aleksandra Fedorova wrote:
> Sorry, but you just need to accept the fact that some _early
> development_ work in Fedora can happen without your decision on it.
I except (and accept) that most of the development work in Fedora happens
without my decision on it.
I would like you on the other hand to accept that major changes in Fedora are
coordinated trough the change process and ELN is part of Fedora.
This for me highlights the fact that our change process is not adapted to all parts of Fedora, in particular parts that need to move faster than the 6 month releases. I have in mind the Container base image, Fedora CoreOS and ELN, IMO these artefact depends more on the content (the set of packages included in them) rather then knowing which version of Fedora release they are based on.
The Container base image and Fedora CoreOS are releasing every couple weeks, ELN is just a rolling release, I think it is unfair to ask to follow a change request system that is design for release that happen every 6 months.
I think we either need a new change request system that is light enough to allow these group to iterate and make changes every week or so, or we need to trust the people involved in these groups to make the best decisions for the Fedora they care about and to also notify anyone that would be impacted by these changes.
I think you're missing the point. When ELN was approved, the intent
was to build Rawhide in a RHEL-ish configuration continuously. This
particular plan defeats what ELN was communicated as because now
there's a major deviation where people can't really participate and
it's not much benefit for everyone else. Moreover, GCC 11 *will* land
in Rawhide, so why not just push it there now? A Change proposal for
GCC 11 still makes sense because it's *for* Fedora in the end too.
Dropping GCC 11 into rawhide now would mean I can't make certain
ABI-breaking changes to the C++20 library in upstream GCC, because it
would be landing on real users' machines. Which means I lose several
weeks of GCC's stage 1 development. No thanks.
The ELN team are willing to deal with the instability of GCC 11 while
in stage 1, I don't think the rest of Fedora and rawhide users are
willing, or should be expected to deal with it.
_______________________________________________
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
