On Fri, Feb 02, 2024 at 12:58:27AM +0100, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote: > Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > The approved KDE change > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/KDE_Plasma_6 indicates the intent > > for existing Plasma X11 installs to switch to Wayland during the upgrade > > process. > > > > There's no perfect answer as some users will be happy to switch to > > Wayland, while others will not, while perhaps more will not even be aware > > of anything changing. > > > > IMHO if the KDE Sig wants the upgrade path to take users from X11 to > > Wayland automatically, then the criteria for allowing back in RPMs > > with X11 builds should include "no interference with the X11->Wayland > > upgrade path determined by the KDE Sig". > > > > The BZ ticket indicates that there was some testing to show that is not > > causing a problem with the upgrades, so it might be a non-issue, but > > setting clear expectations in this respect would be a good idea anyway. > > As I wrote (and confirmed by testing) in the BZ ticket, the packages as > submitted already do not interfere with the X11->Wayland upgrade path > determined by the KDE Sig, and I do not intend changing that. (Adding > versioned self-Obsoletes could possibly theoretically achieve that, but that > is a game I do not intend to play. The only thing I care about, which is why > I bumped that Epoch, is that the upgrade Obsoletes is applied only ONCE on > the upgrade to Fedora 40 and not on routine updates in Fedora 40 or on > upgrades from Fedora 40 to later releases, because anybody who still/again > has the -x11 packages on Fedora 40 has explicitly opted in and should not > have to opt in repeatedly.) > > While (as also stated in the BZ ticket) I disagree that it is helpful to > forcefully remove the -x11 packages on the upgrade to F40, my packages do > not and will not interfere with that process. > There seems to be a way for both sides to get what they want here (note: I am neither, but I hope this might be helpful) - KDE SIG wants to obsolete X11 packages on upgrade just once - Apart from the impact of that, this is actually standard packaging practice when subpackages are no longer offered otherwise the upgrade will break - If the obsolete indicates the NEVRA of the -x11 subpackage being obsoleted, instead of floating to the current NEVRA, you can actually re-provide the missing package without having to bump epoch - KDE SIG likely also want people to test Wayland, so defaulting to the X11 packages being removed makes sense here - *However* there are quite likely cases where Wayland does not work (yet) or could not work (without hardware replacement) for some users' use cases. These should not be given short shrift - So a workaround for such cases needs to be available - There is also concern that any issue will land on the KDE SIG's laps This might address all concerns: - Can we make the x11 packages be named explicitly as compat packages (e.g. prefixed with compat-) - Marking them as deprecated is also reasonable. This is standard practice for compat packages - KDE SIG, as part of the Change Proposal, should also document how to install these compat packages so affected users can install them - After a sufficient grace period where people get their -x11 packages removed by default on upgrade, the compat-*-x11 packages should be allowed to Provide: the old non-compat name so people who upgrade later keep their X11 experience intact - This grace period should be part of the release announcement Does this seem workable? Any feedback appreciated - I try to keep up with this thread but I might have missed some points. Best regards, -- Michel Lind (né Salim) identities: https://keyoxide.org/5dce2e7e9c3b1cffd335c1d78b229d2f7ccc04f2
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 Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
