Proposal: time to set up the fedora-release-{cloud,workstation,server} subpackages

Dennis Gilmore dennis at ausil.us
Wed Jun 18 23:58:49 UTC 2014


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Wed, 18 Jun 2014 16:15:03 -0400
Matthew Miller <mattdm at fedoraproject.org> wrote:

> We talked about this before, but I think now it's getting really
> close to the time when we _need_ it. See
> <https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1110764>... as Dennis
> says, we have not yet decided how to differentiate the different
> Fedora products.
> 
> I suggest that we have fedora-release-{workstation,server,cloud}
> packages. I had originally suggested these as subpackages of
> fedora-release, but I think that it might actually be better to have
> them be separate packages, so they can be maintained and released
> individually.
> 
> These packages could have dependencies on other packages which are
> essential to that product's identity (like ye olde dreaded
> "redhat-lsb", I suppose), and could either contain systemd presets
> appropriate for that product -- or perhaps better, could depend on
> another (for example) fedora-presets-server package.
> 
> Aslo, each workgroup should be able to set what services are started
> in those presets rather than needing a FESCo exception (because
> that's part of the point of the different WGs, after all).
> 
> Right now, all of the packages are drawing from the same repos, but
> this would also provide an avenue for doing that differently in the
> future if we so choose.
> 
> I also suggest that /etc/os-release be switched using the alternatives
> system (http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Alternatives), with
> the variant in either the VERSION field (VERSION="21 (Cloud)") or a
> new os-release field which we would propose -- probably VARIANT. 
> 
> I suppose /etc/issue and /etc/issue.net would also be candidates for
> alternatives.
> 
> 
> Comments? Missing pieces? Better ways to do it? Volunteers to
> implement?
I will handle it, geenric-release is already a mess from things being
done differently to fedora-release. we need things to be done
consistently so they should all be done in one place.

Dennis
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)
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=CC8X
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


More information about the devel mailing list