On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 03:37:11PM -0500, Alexander Scheel wrote: > I second what Robbie has said as well. > > I am against the thought of this change. > > As my team has found out within Red Hat, this repo split has been a > large PITA. Because RHEL also won't self-host and many sub-packages > are missing from released bits that are otherwise available in e.g., > BUILDROOT, building our bits in COPR for QE to test has been an > impossible battle. After close to a year, this use case still hasn't > been enabled internally. But that's not what's being proposed. We've had different repos in Fedora for years -- the main repo, plus updates, plus updates-testing. And we have the separate modularity one now. Fedora is going to continue to self-host, and doesn't have whatever business reason RHEL has for not shipping the buildroot. > Consider also what other groups such as COPR have to do to support > repo splits. Yeah, it might be quick to split it in Koji and repo > files, but the impact on other teams and contributors is a huge > negative. If people have to go searching for special repos and > dependencies to build their packages, the developer experience of > Fedora will suffer more. That will push more people to Ubuntu. I'm not suggesting anything that would require anyone to "go searching for special repos". All that said, I think we can implement something that serves the purpose I'm looking for as metadata. -- Matthew Miller <mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Fedora Project Leader _______________________________________________ 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
