Toshio Kuratomi (a.badger@xxxxxxxxx) said: > > Ngggh. If the point is to have a stack that lives outside of the OS... then > > it should *live outside of the OS*, not be grafted into a subpoint of the > > OS. (IOW, I disagree.) > > At last week's meeting some people were not on board with the idea > that SCLs provided by Fedora in the mainstream Fedora Repositories are > "outside the OS". > > """ > I still say "can't be in opt" but people seem to have decided that > even though SCLs are part of Fedora, they aren't part of Fedora. I > mean, I'm seeing the argument that even though we're shipping them, > they aren't part of the OS. And I just don't understand that. > """ > > @notting, are you able to explain this viewpoint any better? Essentially, it's defining the borders of the OS differently. If you feel that the OS is 'all software shipped by Fedora in the everything repo', then you might feel that they shouldn't belong in /opt. I feel that the actual OS is smaller than "the total of everything that we ship", and so therefore /opt is a place to package other things that Fedora might produce. If it makes it simpler to think of SCLs as additional 'products' that go on top of an OS, does that help? The way that F19/F20 is packaged now in a single repository may not reflect this, but I think the way that the three products are being discussed, with a separate 'environments and stacks' group, with a separate Fedora Commons group, etc. may make this clear. Alternatively, if you look at enterprise releases + EPEL, I would say that you wouldn't consider EPEL 'part of the OS', and treating the same things in Fedora as part of the OS simply because they're part of the same repo isn't necessarily right. Bill -- packaging mailing list packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
