mattdm added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
Whew, long quote. :) I want to call out specifically:
Jan 12 10:02:12 <contyk> I think we want to be shipping a
single compose
Jan 12 10:02:20 <contyk> this single compose could be created by merging two
separate composes
Jan 12 10:02:26 <contyk> one modular, one traditional
Jan 12 10:02:55 <contyk> the two parts should probably have separate repodata so
that you can disable modules and use non-modular tools to work with your RPMs
This is correct, but "should" is actually **MUST**. This is an essential
requirement of the new modularity proposal.
Also:
* We *eventually* want it so that packages from module streams marked as
"default" land in the non-modular repo.
* This is so packagers don't need duplicate work with both f27/f28/f29/rawhide
branches *and* package-4/package-5 (or whatever) branches.
* It is okay if these packages happen to land in _both_ repositories. (In this case,
it's definitely important for there to be a unified compose so that the metadata stays
in sync.)
* I don't think we care about `Workstation/x86_64/modular/repodata` and similar, at
least until sometime in the future where editions _might_ choose to ship with a
non-default stream. But that's probably F30 timeframe or so.
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/releng/issue/7227