On Wednesday, October 16, 2019, Stephen Gallagher <sgall...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 12:05 AM John M. Harris Jr <joh...@splentity.com> > wrote: > > > > On Tuesday, October 15, 2019 6:26:31 PM MST Stephen Gallagher wrote: > > > given that we're talking about the need to migrate defaults > > > > To clarify, that has not been decided, and a prominent option mentioned > in > > this thread is the option to simply require that there is a non-modular > > package. > > An awful lot of people are repeating this as if it's a solution > without understanding the existing architecture. Believe it or not, > attempting to abandon default streams and go back to only non-modular > content available by default is a lot harder than it sounds (or should > be, but I noted that we're working on that in another reply elsewhere > in the thread). There is currently no path to upgrades that would get > back from the modular versions and the closest we could manage would > be to rely on the dist-upgrade distro-sync, but in that case we > *still* need to have DNF recognize that the default stream has changed > (in this case, been dropped) and handle that accordingly. > > It may be more work to go backwards than forwards at this point. > Modularity does provide some useful feature additions, so to my mind > it makes more sense to properly fix the issues we have with it rather > than expend enormous amounts of energy to remove those features and > revert to the old way of doing things. And, yes, reduce Fedora's value > to Red Hat in the process. > > I started this discussion to ask the community to help us identify the > best path *forward*. An endless barrage of "kill it off" replies is > not helpful or productive. If anyone has specific advice on how to > move forward (or, indeed, if you can figure out how to migrate back > without considerable release engineering and packager effort), that > would be productive. Just please keep in mind that we have to go to > war with the army we have, not the one we wish we had. > That's just oversimplified - if you find that the way you are on is the wrong one just moving forward is not necessary the correct thing to do. Going backwards to get a saner state is a worthwhile thing to do. I have yet to see an argument how replacing existing packages with modules or providing default streams by default helps to reach the objective of 'parallel availability' - by dropping the default modules by default you get pretty much that without the downsides.
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
