Il giorno mer 16 ott 2019 alle ore 11:58 Fabio Valentini <decatho...@gmail.com> ha scritto: > > On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 11:50 AM Alexander Bokovoy <aboko...@redhat.com> > wrote: > > > > On ti, 15 loka 2019, John M. Harris Jr wrote: > > >On Tuesday, October 15, 2019 9:40:31 PM MST Neal Gompa wrote: > > >> And to be fair, while it is a hard problem to solve, it's a worthy > > >> one. It makes sense and if done well, could really distinguish Fedora > > >> from the rest in providing a way for codifying individual lifecycles > > >> separately from the distribution. Moreover, with all the container > > >> circus stuff going on, it's become even more important to enable some > > >> kind of parallel availability. > > > > > >If "parallel availability" is the problem Modularity is trying to solve, it > > >seems that Modularity is a failure. You can't install more than one > > >version of > > >a package at once. > > You are mixing up parallel availability and parallel installability. > > These aren't the same. Modularity does solve parallel availability > > problem. It was never designed to solve parallel installability problem. > > And that is, in my opinion, the root source of all the issues that are > currently plaguing Modularity. > Parallel availability without parallel installability can only lead to > problems. > This is just a new, shiny version of DLL hell. Thanks, I hate it.
+1 I totally agree > Fabio > > > >Anyway, this is off topic, in my eyes, the best course of action is to > > >simply > > >require that all modules have a non-modular version in Fedora. This can > > >also > > >be done for things that are currently default modules. Sure, those who have > > >existing installs with modules won't get their install fixed with the > > >current > > >code, but new installations would. That's a start. > > > > I don't think it is not only reasonable to have this requirement but it > > is also detrimental to the project to have the requirement that > > basically doubles the amount of work volunteers have to do. Simply > > providing content of default modules in non-modular way ignores the fact > > that you somehow need to be able to rebuild those packages and they > > might depend in their build dependencies on packages from other modules, > > including non-default streams. > > > > > > -- > > / Alexander Bokovoy > > Sr. Principal Software Engineer > > Security / Identity Management Engineering > > Red Hat Limited, Finland > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > _______________________________________________ > 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 _______________________________________________ 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
