++ to that
Upon last iteration we decided that we are not going to deprecate current
functionality `if fedora == 43; generate unversioned nodejs from this
srpm', but rather move it to unversioned nodejs srpm: 'if fedora == 43;
*pull* nodejs24 and its -bin packages'.
That, in my opinion, is a bit
Dne 05. 08. 25 v 19:01 Stephen Gallagher napsal(a):
On Tue, Aug 5, 2025 at 11:10 AM Jan Stanek wrote:
On Tue, Aug 5, 2025 at 4:37 PM Stephen Gallagher wrote:
Also be aware that you'll need to figure out what to do about `npm`
and other tools that are bundled with the interpreter. They might
As a side note, the metapackage proposal [1], which is the main topic
of this discussion, was already approved by FESCo; so I'm sort of
surprised how much feedback it is receiving now as opposed to the
original change proposal (which received almost none). I'm still open
to suggestions, making this
On Wed, Aug 6, 2025 at 4:19 AM Carl George wrote:
> After reading those changes, something jumps out at me. The term
> "rolling stream" is used, which sounds an awful lot like the RHEL
> concept of a rolling appstream. That makes more sense for RHEL with
> its long lifecycle, but it feels out of
On Tue, Aug 5, 2025 at 7:01 PM Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> That would be in violation of our stable updates policy and would need
> a special FESCo exemption. It would require a compelling argument
> (like: "upstream changed its mind on how long it would be supported").
Ack and good to know. In th
On Tue, Aug 5, 2025 at 7:01 PM Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 5, 2025 at 7:11 PM Carl George wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 5, 2025 at 12:01 PM Stephen Gallagher
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Aug 5, 2025 at 11:10 AM Jan Stanek wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Aug 5, 2025 at 4:37 PM Stephe
On Tue, Aug 5, 2025 at 7:11 PM Carl George wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 5, 2025 at 12:01 PM Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 5, 2025 at 11:10 AM Jan Stanek wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Aug 5, 2025 at 4:37 PM Stephen Gallagher
> > > wrote:
> > > > Also be aware that you'll need to figure ou
On Tue, Aug 5, 2025 at 12:01 PM Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 5, 2025 at 11:10 AM Jan Stanek wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 5, 2025 at 4:37 PM Stephen Gallagher
> > wrote:
> > > Also be aware that you'll need to figure out what to do about `npm`
> > > and other tools that are bundled wit
On Tue, Aug 5, 2025 at 11:10 AM Jan Stanek wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 5, 2025 at 4:37 PM Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > Also be aware that you'll need to figure out what to do about `npm`
> > and other tools that are bundled with the interpreter. They might need
> > their own subpackages.
>
> Yeah, we
On Tue, Aug 5, 2025 at 4:37 PM Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> Also be aware that you'll need to figure out what to do about `npm`
> and other tools that are bundled with the interpreter. They might need
> their own subpackages.
Yeah, we are aware, but here it will depend on what the actual use
cases
On Tue, Aug 5, 2025 at 9:41 AM Andrei Radchenko wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> As a part of the big nodejs packaging overhaul [0][1][2], and exhausting all
> other 'alternatives' solutions, current idea is having separate streams e.g.
> nodejs22 nodejs24 etc, with their corresponding swappable -bin packa
11 matches
Mail list logo
