Proposal to reduce anti-bundling requirements

[Przemek Klosowski]

On 09/14/2015 12:04 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Mon, 2015-09-14 at 12:45 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
>> and much more important:
>>
>> if Fedora changes to more and more recommend "pip", "gem" and "cpan"
>> like installs instead RPM packages it is no longer a distribution
>> over the long because that would mean finally you have a core OS and
>> handle anything else like Microsoft or Apple - does anybody really want to
>> go that road?
> I do. Yes. Or rather, I'd say we're already doing this, we're just not
> clear that we *know* it.
> ....
> And of course there is the brave new world of containers. There is
> currently no 'official' way (so far as I'm aware) to deploy containers
> on Fedora: absolutely everyone who's running Fedora as a container
> host OS is working entirely outside the lines of the distribution-as-
> software-provider.
>
> So do we still believe we're not doing this already?
>

I take your point that an orthodox base system approach is not 
sufficient. What I am worried about, though, is the plethora of 
solutions we are considering to address that: package-specific 
installers, bundling, containers, Composer, secondary repos like Fusion 
and COPR, and I am sure I forgot something else. It just screams 
'combinatorial explosion', with red carpet and a big neon saying 
'combinatorial explosion' over it.

It's great that we have a discussion about which approach is best, but I 
think we should try to pick _something_, rather than giving up and 
welcoming all of them.  Of course, at the moment it's entirely unclear 
and premature to decide, but I believe that at least we should recognize 
that "there should be only one" eventually.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20150916/033a4f51/attachment-0001.html>