On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 12:49:17PM +0000, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > On Mon, Jan 20, 2025 at 04:24:28PM +0100, Miroslav Suchý wrote: > > Dne 20. 01. 25 v 11:29 dop. Michael J Gruber napsal(a): > > > There is a second point to that, and that is Fedora as a development > > > platform (not just as an "app" platform). If we expect developers to > > > install dependencies of their project via the ecosystem tools (pip, ...) > > > locally (envs, containers) and "app packages" do the same during build > > > then it is time to change the fundamental approach to our distribution > > > and view it "merely" as a platform. > > > > Or we can work on the idea of Rings that Matt proposed ages ago [1]. I would > > be +1 for allowing bundling if we allowed it only in a ring N+1 and no > > package from ring N is dependent on package from ring N+1. And each ring has > > its own compose (yum repo). > > > > [1] https://fedoramagazine.org/fedora-present-and-future-a-fedora-next-2014-update-part-ii-whats-happening/ > > Let's not try to revive this. The ring idea is very very dead. Nobody > ever provided any coherent specification of how it could work. And > it is never going to happen, because the build-time dependency graph > between packages is cyclic, with dependencies in "core" packages on > various "leafs". (For example: any system package → libsystemd-devel > from systemd → meson → python → "everything".) While the ring idea as presented there didn't come to exist inside Fedora as a community, I think we can see that concept has indeed grown up outside Fedora. An increasingly large part of the ecosystem is working and deploying a way that Fedora (and derivative distros) are relegated to only delivering what's illustrated as Ring 1. This is especially the case in the CoreOS/SilverBlue spins, but we see it in traditional installs too which only install enough of Fedora to bootstrap the outside world. Meanwhile ring 2 is the space filled by either language specific tools (pip, cargo, rubygems, etc), and some docker container images, while ring 3 is the space filled by Flatpaks and further docker container images. Fedora meanwhile continues trying to package and deliver everything the same way as we did for decades, as if this shift were not happening. What's disappointing is that as end users are adopting use of things from Ring's 2 & 3, they are loosing the potential benefits Fedora's more direct involvement would have enabled. eg, the confidence around licensing of the docker images / flatpaks, the curation of exclusively OSS software collections, the knowledge there's been independant review to ensure the vendor isn't just shipping a sideloaded rootkit, confidence in the build & distribution practices, the knowledge there is someone to stand behind it to deliver security updates, etc. With regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :| -- _______________________________________________ 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
