Renewing the Modularity objective

[Ben Cotton]

Now that Modularity is available for all Fedora variants, it's time to
address issues discovered and improve the experience for packagers and
users. The Modularity team identified a number of projects that will
improve the usefulness of Modularity and the experience of creating
modules for packagers. Thoe team is proposing a renewed objective to
the Fedora Council.

You can read the proposal at:
https://pagure.io/Fedora-Council/council-docs/pull-request/61#request_diff

The Council will vote on this in two weeks.

This is also posted to the Community Blog:
https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/renewing-the-modularity-objective/

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 03:30:58PM -0400, Ben Cotton wrote:
> Now that Modularity is available for all Fedora variants, it's time to
> address issues discovered and improve the experience for packagers and
> users. The Modularity team identified a number of projects that will
> improve the usefulness of Modularity and the experience of creating
> modules for packagers. Thoe team is proposing a renewed objective to
> the Fedora Council.
>
> You can read the proposal at:
> https://pagure.io/Fedora-Council/council-docs/pull-request/61#request_diff

Is it really good to replace the old objective with the new one?
Shouldn't we archive off that one and call this one something else so
you can see what was done when?

Did you want comments here or on the PR? Or both?
(I see a number of folks have commented on the PR... which is awesome!)

I really like the goals/ideas here. We definitely need to improve
modules.

kevin

[Matthew Miller]

On Sun, Sep 22, 2019 at 02:10:11PM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> Is it really good to replace the old objective with the new one?
> Shouldn't we archive off that one and call this one something else so
> you can see what was done when?

Possibly! We've done the modularity objective in phases so far, with greater
and lesser attention to tying off some of the different phases. Do you have
a suggestion for an alternate name?
> Did you want comments here or on the PR? Or both?
> (I see a number of folks have commented on the PR... which is awesome!)

Big picture comments here, details on the PR?