Re: [Modularity] XML format for in-repository modules

2023-01-10 Thread Petr Pisar
V Wed, Dec 07, 2022 at 04:31:36PM -0500, Stephen Gallagher napsal(a): > On Wed, Dec 7, 2022 at 8:40 AM Petr Pisar wrote: > ... > > As you can see, there are no separate documents for modules and default > > streams. Everything is kept inside one document. That enables > > properties (e.g.

Re: [Modularity] XML format for in-repository modules

2023-01-10 Thread Petr Pisar
V Wed, Dec 07, 2022 at 02:45:28PM -, Daniel Alley napsal(a): > > In practice I am not certain that Satellite (and similar tools) can prefer > the XML metadata precisely because it is cut down, so in repos which contain > both Yaml and XML metadata it will not be possible to recreate the

Re: [Modularity] XML format for in-repository modules

2023-01-10 Thread Petr Pisar
V Wed, Dec 07, 2022 at 02:43:32PM +0100, Ewoud Kohl van Wijngaarden napsal(a): > On Wed, Dec 07, 2022 at 02:23:18PM +0100, Petr Pisar wrote: > > Those who should be concerned most are DNF5 developers and relengs producing > > composes. > > There are third party repositories which also publish

Re: [Modularity] XML format for in-repository modules

2022-12-07 Thread Stephen Gallagher
On Wed, Dec 7, 2022 at 8:40 AM Petr Pisar wrote: ... > As you can see, there are no separate documents for modules and default > streams. Everything is kept inside one document. That enables > properties (e.g. obsoletes or default profiles) pertaining the same entity > (e.g. a stream) to be

Re: [Modularity] XML format for in-repository modules

2022-12-07 Thread Daniel Alley
I will always applaud any attempt at standardizing & documenting the metadata format, and I was never thrilled with glib, so this sounds great to me - I only wish that it had been this way from the beginning :) In practice I am not certain that Satellite (and similar tools) can prefer the XML

Re: [Modularity] XML format for in-repository modules

2022-12-07 Thread Petr Pisar
V Wed, Dec 07, 2022 at 02:23:21PM +0100, Petr Pisar napsal(a): > > I'd be glad to hear any comments on the format. > I forgot to mention that I'm taking my vacation now until the very end of this callendar year. So no rush, but do not expect my reponse until then. -- Petr signature.asc

Re: [Modularity] XML format for in-repository modules

2022-12-07 Thread Ewoud Kohl van Wijngaarden
On Wed, Dec 07, 2022 at 02:23:18PM +0100, Petr Pisar wrote: Those who should be concerned most are DNF5 developers and relengs producing composes. There are third party repositories which also publish modular metadata. I know this because in yum.theforeman.org we do this. Do we fall under

Re: [Modularity] XML format for in-repository modules

2022-12-07 Thread Neal Gompa
On Wed, Dec 7, 2022 at 8:23 AM Petr Pisar wrote: > > Hello Fedora developers, > > I'd like to show you a proposal for a new XML format of modular metadata which > reside in YUM repositories. > > In short I propose replacing YAML syntax with XML syntax while removing > features which where never

[Modularity] XML format for in-repository modules

2022-12-07 Thread Petr Pisar
Hello Fedora developers, I'd like to show you a proposal for a new XML format of modular metadata which reside in YUM repositories. In short I propose replacing YAML syntax with XML syntax while removing features which where never implemented or used, while providing a detailed specification