On 09/24/2018 08:52 PM, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 24.9.2018 19:09, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
> I'm in the process of transitioning maintenance of all software to
> modules only. The reason is that module maintenance is much easier
> compared to maintenance of non-modular, "ursine" packages.
> Ideally these packages should be retired instead of orphaning them, but
> these packages are build-required by a lot of other things.
This is an interesting situation. If more maintainers will decide to do
this, we can easily break everything and only have modules, except we
will no longer have any system to have those modules run on.
(I'm not saying you shouldn't do this; I'm just really concerned if
modularity is actually helping Fedora as a whole or if it will
eventually break it entirely.)
I was hoping for a solution like "ursa-major" described in , that
would allow modules to be used as build-dependencies for non-modular
packages. This would allow properly retiring non-modular packages and
maintaining only modules, which would be also used as build dependencies
for non-modular packages. But it seems that currently no one is
interested in implementing such solution.
Java SIG is dying slowly, this package set recently lost another
co-maintainer and I don't have time to maintain all these packages by
myself. Switching to module-only content is probably the best move to
keep high-quality software delivered to our users and reduce maintenance
work at the same time.
Senior Software Engineer, Red Hat