Hello everyone, There's a Modularity Improvements Objective draft available[1].
The Objective summarizes the work that is in progress already as well as highlights our plans for Fedora 34.
We're planning to fix the current modularity in Fedora 33 and 34. We may look into alternatives or bigger design changes in Fedora 35 and later.
You can find more details in the Objective document[1].
- Daniel
[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Objectives/Modularity_Improvements_2020
On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 7:44 AM Daniel Mach dmach@redhat.com wrote:
Hello everyone, There's a Modularity Improvements Objective draft available[1].
The Objective summarizes the work that is in progress already as well as highlights our plans for Fedora 34.
We're planning to fix the current modularity in Fedora 33 and 34. We may look into alternatives or bigger design changes in Fedora 35 and later.
You can find more details in the Objective document[1].
- Daniel
[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Objectives/Modularity_Improvements_2020
This looks pretty good. I'm excited to see these improvements as they come!
On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 01:44:07PM +0200, Daniel Mach wrote:
There's a Modularity Improvements Objective draft available[1].
The Objective summarizes the work that is in progress already as well as highlights our plans for Fedora 34.
We're planning to fix the current modularity in Fedora 33 and 34. We may look into alternatives or bigger design changes in Fedora 35 and later.
You can find more details in the Objective document[1].
- Daniel
[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Objectives/Modularity_Improvements_2020
I hope that you find resources to properly maintain MBS. Currently (last two weeks) it cannot build the modules https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/9066.
-- Petr
Dne 24. 07. 20 v 14:25 Petr Pisar napsal(a):
On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 01:44:07PM +0200, Daniel Mach wrote:
There's a Modularity Improvements Objective draft available[1].
The Objective summarizes the work that is in progress already as well as highlights our plans for Fedora 34.
We're planning to fix the current modularity in Fedora 33 and 34. We may look into alternatives or bigger design changes in Fedora 35 and later.
You can find more details in the Objective document[1].
- Daniel
[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Objectives/Modularity_Improvements_2020
I hope that you find resources to properly maintain MBS.
+1
This document seems to focus on "DNF" side of thing, while completely missing the infrastructure side. E.g. MBS, dist-git, mass rebuilds, etc.
Vít
Currently (last two weeks) it cannot build the modules https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/9066.
-- Petr
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
On Fri, 24 Jul 2020 at 13:26, Petr Pisar ppisar@redhat.com wrote:
On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 01:44:07PM +0200, Daniel Mach wrote:
There's a Modularity Improvements Objective draft available[1].
The Objective summarizes the work that is in progress already as well as highlights our plans for Fedora 34.
We're planning to fix the current modularity in Fedora 33 and 34. We may look into alternatives or bigger design changes in Fedora 35 and later.
You can find more details in the Objective document[1].
- Daniel
[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Objectives/Modularity_Improvements_2020
I hope that you find resources to properly maintain MBS. Currently (last two weeks) it cannot build the modules https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/9066.
-- Petr
I opened this ticket more than two months ago. :-(
What's *worse* is that before I filed that infra ticket I filed this ticket [1] at the MBS upstream project and that got *absolutely* no response. Complete silence. In fact *no* ticket reported there haven't seen any activity in months. Not exactly confidence inspiring for the future of the project.
[1] https://pagure.io/fm-orchestrator/issue/1640
I've tried *so* hard to get on board with modularity but I think I'm done with modules now in Fedora.
In the early days the people who maintained MBS were super helpful and worked hard to fix the bugs I found in it, but now it feels like those days are gone and still it's just hurdle after hurdle. All I want is an easy life, and I thought modules were that, but it's impossible to get anything done in a timely manner, builds have required so much babysitting, the MBS requiring (already scarce) releng resources to intervene periodically.... Honestly, it's been just exhausting and demoralising how many man-hours have gone to waste. So I've pulled all my packages back into mainline Fedora since that seems to be the path of least resistance even though I will once again have to maintain multiple branches of my whole stack of packages.
Interesting experiment, maybe, but if there's going to be no commitment to pay the on-going cost of infra maintenance and fix the design-flaws or whatever serious problem is currently holding back MBS, then I have to end the experiment for my own sanity at least.
mbooth
On Fri, 24 Jul 2020 at 16:10, Mat Booth fedora@matbooth.co.uk wrote:
On Fri, 24 Jul 2020 at 13:26, Petr Pisar ppisar@redhat.com wrote:
On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 01:44:07PM +0200, Daniel Mach wrote:
There's a Modularity Improvements Objective draft available[1].
The Objective summarizes the work that is in progress already as well as highlights our plans for Fedora 34.
We're planning to fix the current modularity in Fedora 33 and 34. We may look into alternatives or bigger design changes in Fedora 35 and later.
You can find more details in the Objective document[1].
- Daniel
[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Objectives/Modularity_Improvements_2020
I hope that you find resources to properly maintain MBS. Currently (last two weeks) it cannot build the modules https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/9066.
-- Petr
I opened this ticket more than two months ago. :-(
Err, more than one month ago sorry. Apologies if that mischaracterised the situation.
On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 11:10 AM Mat Booth fedora@matbooth.co.uk wrote:
On Fri, 24 Jul 2020 at 13:26, Petr Pisar ppisar@redhat.com wrote:
On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 01:44:07PM +0200, Daniel Mach wrote:
There's a Modularity Improvements Objective draft available[1].
The Objective summarizes the work that is in progress already as well as highlights our plans for Fedora 34.
We're planning to fix the current modularity in Fedora 33 and 34. We may look into alternatives or bigger design changes in Fedora 35 and later.
You can find more details in the Objective document[1].
- Daniel
[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Objectives/Modularity_Improvements_2020
I hope that you find resources to properly maintain MBS. Currently (last two weeks) it cannot build the modules https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/9066.
-- Petr
I opened this ticket more than two months ago. :-(
What's *worse* is that before I filed that infra ticket I filed this ticket [1] at the MBS upstream project and that got *absolutely* no response. Complete silence. In fact *no* ticket reported there haven't seen any activity in months. Not exactly confidence inspiring for the future of the project.
[1] https://pagure.io/fm-orchestrator/issue/1640
I've tried *so* hard to get on board with modularity but I think I'm done with modules now in Fedora.
In the early days the people who maintained MBS were super helpful and worked hard to fix the bugs I found in it, but now it feels like those days are gone and still it's just hurdle after hurdle. All I want is an easy life, and I thought modules were that, but it's impossible to get anything done in a timely manner, builds have required so much babysitting, the MBS requiring (already scarce) releng resources to intervene periodically.... Honestly, it's been just exhausting and demoralising how many man-hours have gone to waste. So I've pulled all my packages back into mainline Fedora since that seems to be the path of least resistance even though I will once again have to maintain multiple branches of my whole stack of packages.
Interesting experiment, maybe, but if there's going to be no commitment to pay the on-going cost of infra maintenance and fix the design-flaws or whatever serious problem is currently holding back MBS, then I have to end the experiment for my own sanity at least.
Unfortunately, MBS is maintained by a different team: the team that maintains Koji. I am unsure about what they're planning to do, but I hope they're going to do *something*.
On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 11:17 AM Neal Gompa ngompa13@gmail.com wrote:
Unfortunately, MBS is maintained by a different team: the team that maintains Koji. I am unsure about what they're planning to do, but I hope they're going to do *something*.
With my Council hat on, I'd like to see that team represented in the Objective if their involvement is going to be critical to the success of Modularity.
On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 11:16:16AM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote:
Unfortunately, MBS is maintained by a different team: the team that maintains Koji. I am unsure about what they're planning to do, but I hope they're going to do *something*.
To add history here, MBS was written by and maintained by a different team until early this year, when it was handed off to the koji team.
Last I heard they were still trying to get up to speed on the codebase, etc. It's not easy to take a codebase someone else has written and maintained and take it over. ;(
I'm of course not speaking for them, and hopefully they will chime in here with more info...
kevin