On Mon, Aug 07, 2017 at 07:58:35PM +0000, Langdon White wrote:
> We haven't documented this yet because we have been working through the
> details of the how it should work. Basically, we need to provide a way, on
> the system, to define:
> a) what the "release" is. In other words, what did the Edition-WG decide
> should be *installed* by default and what should be *available* by default.
> For example, less version 487 should be installed, and httpd-2.4 should be
> available.
> b) how to "walk" the streams, hopefully automatically. In other words, if a
> user makes no changes, how does s/he move from foo:1 -> foo:1.1 (where "1"
> and "1.1" are different streams) vs foo:1 -> foo:2. And, in a related way,
> how can s/he choose *not* to follow the guidelines. For example, I am
> running a simple html website. I want to follow every upgrade to httpd that
> comes out, assuming it doesn't change it's configuration method (so, auto
> jump httpd2.4->httpd2.6). However, my php website should stick to
> httpd2.4.z.

We don't need "b" for F27, but if we build any deliverables for it
using Modularity, we sure do need it for F28. Otherwise, users have no
upgrade path.

> We think this needs a simple DSL kinda like python requirements, nodejs
> package, or even like rpm. We needed Boltron to make how this problem is
> expressed "real." I am glad the question is coming up ;)

"We need a new DSL" sends shivers down my spine.

Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Reply via email to