On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 12:02 AM John M. Harris Jr <joh...@splentity.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday, November 12, 2019 9:02:07 AM MST Aleksandra Fedorova wrote: > > Again, no one forces you or any other packager to use modularity > > tooling right now. > > This is not actually the case. We have several major packages which are > ONLY > available as modules, for example. > So people would prefer no packages at all over packages in modules? I ask this as the traditional rpm way of doing is simply not working and that's the reason why many of us (old time Java packagers) just gave up, it's purely impossible to satisfy the needs of multiple "major" packages with same set of dependencies. This is not Java problem only for sure - look at Rust, Go, etc. I would being proved wrong but modularity at least gives an option for RPMs to continue to be viable option. With all it's weirdness so far no one gave better solution working to that extend at least. > > -- > John M. Harris, Jr. > Splentity > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > -- Alexander Kurtakov Red Hat Eclipse Team
_______________________________________________ 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
