[Fedora-packaging] use case for scl-as-not-scl rebuilds [was: Re:SCL -- buildtime information]

[Matthew Miller]

On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 09:36:02AM +0200, Jan Kaluža wrote:
> file in extra branch, it's not the "very same .spec file" and I
> actually don't see any reason why SCL spec file should be buildable
> as non-SCL package (unless we decide to build them from "very same
> branch" - meaning that you would have single .spec file in "f19"
> branch and build it twice - once as SCL and once as normal package).
> I don't see use-case for this.

I actually have a use-case for this. Each SCL could be built as an an SCL
for inclusion in "main" Fedora, and also built as a normal package into a
per-SCL repo. Then, application containers (for use with Docker) could be
constructed from the non-SCLized versions. In the container, the (for
example) /usr/bin/ruby would be exactly the user-wanted version, with no
need for a wrapper or any SCL-awareness.

The advantage of this is that if someone is maintaining and testing these
multi-version language stacks for other purposes _anyway_, we can get the
benefit.

(This plus good tooling for constructing the appliances = killer feature for
Fedora cloud.)


-- 
Matthew Miller  ☁☁☁  Fedora Cloud Architect  ☁☁☁  <mattdm at fedoraproject.org>