Fedora Ring 0 definition

[Petr Pisar]

On 2015-09-14, Brendan Conoboy <blc at redhat.com> wrote:
> On 09/07/2015 05:34 AM, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
>> So we are going to include all those *-doc subpackages? And all
>> languages bindings? E.g look at rpm subpackages.
>
> Yes, this is a good question.  Per elsewhere in the thread, it may
> make sense to have 2 composes: One for the bits that Requires can be
> satisfied, a second that requires outer rings to satisfy.  It is
> a little messy though, and will require a more nuanced expression of
> rules for inputs and outputs.
>
When implementing it you will find executables that link to myriad
libraries because these dependencies can be configures at build time
only. Packages delivering these executables cannot be split into more
subpacakges to ease dependency hell.

In my opinion, the only solution is to allow Fedora packages to be built
multiple times with different configuration or the allow the packages to
build the same sources multiple times and scatter them into subpackages.
Of course then reversely depending packages will have to be more picky
when specifying a depenency.

I think Fedora requires more radical changes than shifting binary
packages from one repository to another.

-- Petr