Hi Neal,
On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 1:02 PM Neal Gompa <ngompa13(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 17, 2024 at 10:43 PM Nathan Scott <nathans(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 12:29 PM Neal Gompa <ngompa13(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > > [...]
> > > retaining Redis will just hurt us in the long term.
> >
> > Noone is saying we should retain Redis. I'm advocating for a more
> > appropriate transition that is respectful of the work and expertise the
> > existing package maintainers bring.
> >
> > I think f41 is appropriate and possible, but "more haste, less
speed"
> > is the way to get there, with minimal breakage to Fedora and users.
> >
>
> From my perspective, I don't see any breakage happening. We also
> haven't *done* anything yet.
>
Sooo, about that... :) I see there is a valkey build winging its way
toward f39 and f38 now:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/?packages=valkey
If someone has an active redis installation on those systems and
install that - aren't they in for a bit of a surprise? Correct me if I'm
wrong, but this will replace redis - leaving /var/lib/redis with their
current data, and start a new "redis-server" (aka "valkey-server")
process writing into a new, empty rdb file below /var/lib/valkey, no?
If so, how do they reconcile those split rdb files?
Let's slow down a bit, it's not so urgent that we risk peoples data.
The package does not have any Obsoletes, so nothing should happen unless
users take explicit action to install valkey.