On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 01:30:32PM -0400, Colin Walters wrote: > > Hopefully, by the time we are at F28, Modularity will provide a way for > > us to offer faster streams for people who want them -- but let's also > > focus on stable releases. > > But with Modularity, how much does it even make sense to talk about > "Fedora" releases in a generic fashion with a 6mo cadence? Aren't we > likely for many modules to only have a single stream (or multiple) > that may not match that cadence?
I think we're still going to have a large number of packages that aren't on that model in a year. And, I expect we will still have a base runtime (or something) that comes out on a six-month cycle -- and we'll probably want to have some release artifacts (like Workstation) which also follow that cycle. > It seems to me offhand that some things like the Change process will be around > modules, and then changes in those modules get reflected into any editions > they > affect? A lot of the Changes listed here: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/26/ChangeSet > would seem to be for the base module, but there are several > desktop/Workstation > specific ones. And we get into a lot of interesting questions around the > intersection > of the languages and Workstation, depending on what gets installed by default. > (My take would be to reduce the amount of things installed by default, and > really > encourage doing most development in containers, decoupled from the base host > lifecycle, like Atomic Host) Sounds good to me! -- Matthew Miller <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
