On Thu, 2019-10-10 at 16:40 +0200, Lukas Ruzicka wrote:
> So despite providing zero feedback here, this was voted at the
> modularity meeting:
> * Tagging Module Defaults into non-modular repo (sgallagh,
> * AGREED: We disagree with merging default streams into the main
> as non-modular packages. Our approach is to implement a
> mechanism of
> following default streams to give people the experience they
> (+4 0 -0) (asamalik, 16:07:40)
based on this discussion, pushing content in modular defaults is not
the experience that people want. I have been a bit ill
for some time and before I could add my point to the discussion,
everything has been more or less said.
Just for illustration, this is what I wanted to say about it:
Modularity should stay away from my system until I call for it -> now
it is not the case, because modularity sneaks into users' computer
through modular defaults that overcome the non-modular packages. Gimp
is the first such "horse" that jumps into almost everybody's desktop
and they are modular without even knowing it.Modularity should
provide alternative content, if I need it and when I need it. Modules
should be installable only through "dnf module" command and not
through the regular dnf command, so that I explicitely need to allow
modularity on my system.The naming conventions of the streams should
be obligatory for every module packager. So, if we decide that we
want a "latest" stream, then all modules should have a "latest"
stream for rolling updates. Currently, they all have various names of
streams, from which I cannot tell anything. If there should be a
"slow" path, then again, all modules should have a "slow" path.Non-
modular Fedora must be a valid use case and remain an option.
I can imagine to not having the non-modular content at all. Everything
be packaged as modules but it has to be in a different shape than it is
now. That approach would simplify things by other direction.
I don't care that I'm using modules as long as it works as expected and
I'm not dealing with broken upgrade paths or conflicts thanks to this
feature. It would be even interesting to have (as someone mentioned
here) fast and slow streams. So if you are running Fedora-Server you
can default to slow one and if you like rolling updates distributions
(but fear the Rawhide) then go to the fast stream.
If I decide to go modular, there must be a way to go non-modular
again, without breaking the system. Or, if modular is the only
option, so if I go into specific streams, there must be a way to go
to defaults without breaking the system. With non-modular defaults,
this seems easy. With modules? I am not sure.We need to expect that
once there are hundreds of modules, people will install all possible
combinations and they all will need to work. I am not sure, we will
be able to test something like that.
Seeing the reaction of the Modularity WG ... I do not understand how
it is possible that such important decisions are taken by 4 people
without any Fedora wide discussions like this. And yet, it seems a
little bit that even opinions on this list will not fall on fertile
I wish the communication improved in the first place. Community means
> should aim for solution 1. if solution 2. is not negotiable by the
> modularity WG.
_______________________________________________devel mailing list --
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: