On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 5:56 PM Stephen Gallagher <sgallagh@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA256
>
> I've just published a fourth version[1] of the ELN proposal. With a
> lot of input from Miro Hrončok, I think I've finally been able to
> clarify some of the points that we were getting hung up on.
>
> Changes in this version of the proposal[2]:
>
> * Improve our explanation of why we are doing ELN in the first place
> * Clarify the relationship with Rawhide
> * Better describe what happens if packages don't build on ELN
> * Explain our plan for when to use conditionals (this was getting a
> larger share of the conversation than it warranted because we didn't
> do a good job of explaining that they should be the exception and not
> the rule)
> * Clarify that the time limit on PRs is only for determining if the
> maintainer is responsive. If they reply, the timer is cleared.
> * Fixed the question about upstream features to make it clear that
> what we meant is that new features should go upstream first, not be
> implemented as a fork in ELN
> * Added a section explaining how we will deal with side-tags
> * Make it clear that we don't want to diverge wherever possible and
> that any planned divergence should be discussed with the ELN SIG ahead
> of time
> * Cleaned up the contingency plan section.
>
> I hope that these changes will make our position more clear. Thank you
> to everyone who has contributed to this discussion. I think the
> feedback has been very valuable and I sincerely appreciate it.
>
This version of the proposal is nearly perfect, in my view.
There are a couple of things I think should change:
* The DistTag should be versioned. Either .eln.elX (e.g. .eln.el9),
.elnX (e.g. .eln9), or just plain .elX (e.g. .el9).
* Likewise, I think the Koji tags should be versioned too.
I've personally been burned enough times by not having versioned
DistTags for personal rebuilds that I would strongly suggest you
reconsider having unversioned ones.
Would you mind explaining some of the situations in which you were burned? I’m not ruling this out, but I’d like a clear justification if we were to change something.
Finally, there is no adequate explanation for why ELN content can't go
out to the mirrors like Rawhide content does. I'd vastly prefer that
simply to have similar levels of availability as consumers of ELN
content. I would prefer seeing it go to the mirror network like
everything else.
It’s not so much that it *cannot* as that we are trying not to overload the mirror network with content not useful to non-developers.
Beyond that, this looks pretty good! Thanks for listening and
incorporating everyone's feedback!
Thanks!
--
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org