Le 2019-07-23 08:32, Alexander Bokovoy a écrit :
On ma, 22 heinä 2019, Jeremy Cline wrote:
On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 06:59:04PM +0300, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
On ma, 22 heinä 2019, Jeremy Cline wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 21, 2019 at 05:37:10PM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > Keycloak is not generally Fedora contributor friendly. Aside from it
> > being written in Java (which is problematic with the Java stack in
> > Fedora slowly imploding...), Keycloak is a lot less flexible and a lot
> > more tied to aspects of RHEL/Fedora that make it annoying to use in
> > other environments.
>
> This sounds more like an issue with Fedora's Java stack. I don't love
> Java anymore than anyone else (I think), but I really don't understand
> why a language plays such a huge role.
It is mostly due to supportability of the packages in Fedora. Java
products tend to be split into smaller packages and an overhead for
maintaining them grows a lot. In 2019 Fedora Java packages got
dropped
by one of maintainers and that created a havoc as many packages
depend
on few important ones that were suddenly not supported anymore and
were
going to be orphaned.
The same is, I think, true of many other languages. I think it's a
sign
that our approach to packaging is going to have to change. Just
looking
at the package stats by language at https://libraries.io/ and
comparing
it to the size of the Fedora repositories is telling.
That or those language libraries' repositories would need to evolve
too.
After all, not all of them have strong authenticity guarantees and
ability to account for changes on a local installation.
It is unrealistic to expect those repositories to evolve towards
something easier to deploy in production, when the tooling we use to
prepare and deploy in production is seen as dated, awkward to use, and
not keeping up with the times.
The first answer language package upstreams will give (and have already
been giving for several years) is “fix your own tools and then we'll
talk. I don’t want to work with your legacy pile of *.”
20 years ago rpm was on the bleeding edge of innovation and projects
were happy to accommodate its needs to partake in a bright new future.
It’s not anymore. It didn’t keep up. And that’s not because the people
who work on rpm are not outstanding contributors, that’s because they’ve
been tasked to do minimal changes without rocking the boat (and given
the corresponding resources).
Regards,
--
Nicolas Mailhot
_______________________________________________
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
