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 <mat...@fedoraproject.org> Fedora Project Leader _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- firstname.lastname@example.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org