On Thursday, November 14, 2019 6:51:05 AM MST Stephen Gallagher wrote:
What you are saying is that *you* don't like what you are
hearing
about modules. And that's fine; some of your feedback has been
constructive and we're taking it into account. But assuming that you
represent the whole of the user community is somewhat of an
overstatement. As I discussed in the blog post I wrote, this was
designed with users in mind.
It seems that a large portion of the community, at least those vocal on this
thread, do agree with Miro, at least as surface value, myself included.
Yes, we acknowledge that with multiple versions comes the risks of
introducing more conflicts. We balanced that out by acknowledging that
the container space is now mature enough that separating userspaces
when you need to run conflicting apps on the same machine is a
reasonable solution to that problem. You've asserted elsewhere that
you don't like containers as a technology because it's duplication of
content and doesn't espouse your view of the ideal distribution of
"everything uses the same (latest) version of the library". I
understand that, but containers are here to stay and Modules help us
provide trustworthy content for them.
What do containers have to do with Modularity? Is this a Silverblue project
now?
Believe me, I wish that the ideal distribution was possible too. The
reality is that the world has gone in a different direction and Fedora
needs to adapt to that. Holding the line and refusing to budge just
means people will go around us and stop considering us relevant.
This is simply not true. Debian is another clear example of this.
--
John M. Harris, Jr.
Splentity