On Tue, 2022-09-06 at 14:28 -0400, Ben Cotton wrote: > > == Scope == > * Proposal owners: > > DNF5 is still in the development and some of the features or options > are not yet available. We still have to finish the implementation of > Modularity, storing internal data related to History and System State, > and also documentation and man pages. DNF5 can be tested from > repository with upstream nightly builds - > https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/rpmsoftwaremanagement/dnf5-unstable/. > The project's github repository is here - > https://github.com/rpm-software-management/dnf5/ > > * Other developers: > * Release engineering: [https://pagure.io/releng/issues #Releng issue number]
[snip] > == Dependencies == > There is a long list of dependent packages > > === dnf === > > auter > calamares > copr-builder > cpanspec > dnf-plugin-diff > dnfdragora > etckeeper-dnf > fedora-review > fedora-upgrade > kiwi-systemdeps-core > libdnf-plugin-subscription-manager > lpf > mock > osbuild > perl-CPAN-Plugin-Sysdeps > policycoreutils-devel > rbm > subscription-manager > supermin > system-config-language > > === python3-dnf === > > anaconda-core > dnf-plugin-ovl > dnfdaemon > fedora-easy-karma > fedora-review > lorax > mock-core-configs > module-build-service > modulemd-tools > needrestart > pungi > python3-bodhi-client > python3-dnf-plugin-cow > python3-dnf-plugin-flunk_dependent_remove > python3-imgcreate > python3-libreport > retrace-server > system-config-language > > === libdnf === > > PackageKit > copr-builder > gnome-software-rpm-ostree > libdnf-plugin-subscription-manager > libdnf-plugin-swidtags > libdnf-plugin-txnupd > > === python3-hawkey === > > mock-core-configs > modulemd-tools > python3-rpmdeplint > retrace-server So, I feel like it's an issue that we have this huge list of dependencies of the current implementation, but up there under "Other developers:" in the Scope section, there is nothing. The list of dependencies implies a fairly considerable amount of work is going to be necessary on the part of "other developers" to adapt all of these dependencies to dnf5. A lot of those dependencies are very important - they are core components of how we work on, build, and use Fedora. I think this Change needs explicit buy-in from the maintainers of dependent packages, and a clear plan and timeline for how those packages will be ported to dnf5 such that the Change can land smoothly in F39 timeframe. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA IRC: adamw | Twitter: adamw_ha https://www.happyassassin.net _______________________________________________ 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 Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
