Re: Modularity and packagers [was Re: PkgDB and the ArbitraryBranching Change]
On 08/06/17 18:54, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Thu, Jun 08, 2017 at 06:48:27PM +0100, Tom Hughes wrote:
> I mean it would probably still be quite daunting for somebody that
> did want to get into more detail I guess but I think I wound up
> there following through from some of the other stuff about arbitrary
> branching and I was mostly just trying to see what changes I (as a
> packager largely avoiding modularity) might find it impossible to
> avoid and that was just the point at which I decided I wasn't likely
> to find anything useful to that goal there and bailed out.
Tom, you work on Node stuff, right? Do you think any of this might be
useful for packaging and maintaining that in Fedora?
Well from what I understand I don't see how it will help with any of the
problems that we have internally with packaging Node stuff.
I mean assuming you're talking about the node interpreter and node
libraries (ie modules but I'll avoid that name as it will be confusing
here) all being part of a Fedora module then I don't see how it helps at
all because the issue with node packaging is the number of dependencies
within the node stack and the rate of change of those dependencies.
Tom
--
Tom Hughes (tom(a)compton.nu)
http://compton.nu/