On 04/03/13 02:51 PM, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
On Thu, 2012-12-06 at 07:06 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Thu, 2012-12-06 at 15:30 +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
IMHO use of software collections is a symptom of a badly run organisation
not devoting enough cycles to maintain the software it
Hi,
I find it sad that people are still arguing for the developer-oriented I
only care about making application Y as easy to maintain on a wide variety
of platforms as possible, and dismiss sysadmin security concerns as too
inconvenient to follow, at the very same time one of the biggest
I'll interject my thoughts here (speaking just for myself):
I think software collections are a great thing for us to provide
tooling for and make easy for our users/consumers to use.
That said, I don't think Fedora as a distribution should ever ship any
of them. The tools/framework/etc, great.
On Mon, 2013-03-04 at 22:51 +, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
(following up with more thoughts from the distutils-sig thread)
It started here:
http://mail.python.org/pipermail/distutils-sig/2013-February/020030.html
and now we're talking about Software Collections here:
On Thu, 2012-12-06 at 07:06 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Thu, 2012-12-06 at 15:30 +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
IMHO use of software collections is a symptom of a badly run organisation
not devoting enough cycles to maintain the software it uses, and hoping
(as in wishful thinking) no
Hey,
Just forwarding it here so Python folks don't miss it on the main devel
list.
Thanks,
Mark.
Forwarded Message
From: Mark McLoughlin mar...@redhat.com
Reply-to: Mark McLoughlin mar...@redhat.com
To: Development discussions related to Fedora
- Original Message -
On Thu, 2012-12-06 at 07:06 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Thu, 2012-12-06 at 15:30 +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
IMHO use of software collections is a symptom of a badly run
organisation
not devoting enough cycles to maintain the software it uses, and
What is the difficult on adding a file to yum.repo.d ?
It is designed for that. Each initial page for an aditional repo would
have instructions on how to activate it and provide a repo file to copy from.
- Original Message -
From: Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com
To: Development
On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 07:33:13PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
What I'm confused about is how this would work in terms of Fedora
policy (not in terms of the software).
Yes, that's important to cover too.
Let's say that we decided that OCaml was non-core. It would be in a
collection,
On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 10:06 AM, Fernando Nasser fnas...@redhat.comwrote:
What is the difficult on adding a file to yum.repo.d ?
It is designed for that. Each initial page for an aditional repo would
have instructions on how to activate it and provide a repo file to copy
from.
The
On 12/09/2012 03:32 PM, Michael Scherer wrote:
snip
Having one repo and refusing commercial software are 2 different issues.
Really, they're not though. The problem is that stuff is shipped
in-distro and builds deps on core packages, and those packages are
revved in a symbiotic relationship
On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 7:02 PM, Jon Masters j...@redhat.com wrote:
I'd love LSB to matter more. But I didn't raise that can of worms
intentionally :) To drill down to a single point though, as I said
above, I don't want the distro to ship every piece of software I might
use. Today, there is
On 12/11/2012 01:09 PM, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
Yeah, our how to join Fedora process makes it easiest to start by
adding to the number of packages instead of by adding to the quality
of existing packages. It might be beneficial to have things the other
way - if someone could find a practical way
On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 01:02:41PM -0500, Jon Masters wrote:
I'd love LSB to matter more. But I didn't raise that can of worms
intentionally :) To drill down to a single point though, as I said
above, I don't want the distro to ship every piece of software I might
use. Today, there is too much
see in line
- Original Message -
From: Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com
To: Development discussions related to Fedora
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2012 2:33:13 PM
Subject: Re: What would it take to make Software Collections work in Fedora?
On Tue,
On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 03:18:42PM -0500, Fernando Nasser wrote:
From: Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com
So let's say the user has to add the OCaml repo themselves. That's
difficult for the user because lots of tools like yum search no
longer work well.
Really? If I add several
On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 5:17 PM, Matthew Miller mat...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
I think, though, that this tool, integrated well and supported, could really
help us in Fedora (and in EPEL). So, I'd like to
a) enumerate the problems with Software Collections in Fedora,
Nicolas's mail has
2012/12/10 Miloslav Trmač m...@volny.cz:
On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 5:17 PM, Matthew Miller mat...@fedoraproject.org
wrote:
I think, though, that this tool, integrated well and supported, could really
help us in Fedora (and in EPEL). So, I'd like to
a) enumerate the problems with Software
On 12/06/2012 10:38 AM, Michael Scherer wrote:
People are annoyed to go to different bugzilla to report bugs, people
are annoyed to go to different shops to shop for stuff ( as seen by the
success of amazon, or even itunes, etc ), so why would it make sense to
have a different way depending
Le dimanche 09 décembre 2012 à 14:26 -0500, Jon Masters a écrit :
On 12/06/2012 10:38 AM, Michael Scherer wrote:
People are annoyed to go to different bugzilla to report bugs, people
are annoyed to go to different shops to shop for stuff ( as seen by the
success of amazon, or even itunes,
On 12/06/2012 05:08 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 10:50:03AM -0500, Mark Bidewell wrote:
I used to use Fedora as my primary OS (Now I use a Mac). The major issue
which drove me away and which I believe SC would help to solve is that with
the current dependency model is
Dne 6.12.2012 17:31, Seth Vidal napsal(a):
On Thu, 6 Dec 2012, Jan Zelený wrote:
The original use case for SCLs is to provide a way to deliver newer
versions
of SW in stable distributions like RHEL/CentOS than those available
in the
core system and make sure system packages and
Fernando Nasser fnas...@redhat.com a écrit:
And _maintain_ them, with all security fixes.
The problem with duplication is above all one of scalability of
maintenance.
Please, avoiding top-posting like this would be very welcome here.
Otherwise, it is quite hard to know what you are replying
- Original Message -
From: Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com
To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Sent: Friday, December 7, 2012 11:54:46 AM
Subject: Re: What would it take to make Software Collections work in Fedora?
Dne 6.12.2012 17:31, Seth Vidal napsal(a):
On Thu, 6 Dec 2012,
On 12/06/2012 07:00 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 22:25 -0600, Michael Ekstrand wrote:
On 12/05/2012 03:06 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
Matthew Miller (mat...@fedoraproject.org) said:
Three things:
1) Fedora is big enough that we have concrete situations where one size
On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 8:55 AM, Radek Vokal rvo...@redhat.com wrote:
On 12/06/2012 07:00 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 22:25 -0600, Michael Ekstrand wrote:
On 12/05/2012 03:06 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
Matthew Miller (mat...@fedoraproject.org) said:
Three things:
1)
On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 8:55 AM, Radek Vokal rvo...@redhat.com wrote:
On 12/06/2012 07:00 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 22:25 -0600, Michael Ekstrand wrote:
On 12/05/2012 03:06 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
Matthew Miller (mat...@fedoraproject.org) said:
Three things:
1)
On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 6:39 AM, Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com wrote:
Dne 5.12.2012 22:14, Kevin Fenzi napsal(a):
I cant seem to find any specific fpc ticket where they discussed this,
but I am pretty sure it was brought up before there. I'd check with
them...
On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 4:04 PM, Matthew Miller mat...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
3) It's the ecosystem. If using Software Collections on RHEL is good for
your company, it's good for it to work on Fedora, because a) we're the
upstream and problems get worked out here, b) development
On 12/06/2012 01:00 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 22:25 -0600, Michael Ekstrand wrote:
On 12/05/2012 03:06 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
Matthew Miller (mat...@fedoraproject.org) said:
Three things:
1) Fedora is big enough that we have concrete situations where one size
On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 10:40 AM, Jon Masters j...@redhat.com wrote:
On 12/06/2012 01:00 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 22:25 -0600, Michael Ekstrand wrote:
On 12/05/2012 03:06 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
Matthew Miller (mat...@fedoraproject.org) said:
Three things:
On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 02:08:28AM -0500, Bohuslav Kabrda wrote:
I don't think I fully understand your question here. Every SCL is confined
in its own root under /opt/.../name/root. So you can either do two SCLs,
^^^
Or wherever we decide is the appropriate place -- I
On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 10:40:13AM -0500, Jon Masters wrote:
We could draw them between Core and Extras!
:) Note that just because we got rid of Core doesn't mean that it was a
bad idea. Ubuntu even adopted a Core of their own a while back. Maybe
The bad idea was the insider-vs-outsider
On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 10:54:46AM +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
In my previous job, we were developing application for our internal
customer. During development, we were free to use any library which
suited our needs. However, in some point, our customer was satisfied
with functionality he had
On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 12:49 PM, Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com wrote:
I think the real lesson is that platforms should take backwards
compatibility more seriously. The single best decision that libvirt
has ever made was to promise to support the libvirt API and ABI
forever. If you
On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 05:49:24PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
I think the real lesson is that platforms should take backwards
compatibility more seriously. The single best decision that libvirt
has ever made was to promise to support the libvirt API and ABI
forever. If you wrote a
Marcela Mašláňová (mmasl...@redhat.com) said:
You're using a Mac now, so good luck.
But I'm pretty sure that software collections would not have helped
you to upgrade Libreoffice. Which, by the way, is possible without
upgrading everything: just compile the later SRPMs. In other words,
On 12/07/2012 12:30 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 10:40:13AM -0500, Jon Masters wrote:
We could draw them between Core and Extras!
:) Note that just because we got rid of Core doesn't mean that it was a
bad idea. Ubuntu even adopted a Core of their own a while back. Maybe
Dne 5.12.2012 22:14, Kevin Fenzi napsal(a):
I cant seem to find any specific fpc ticket where they discussed this,
but I am pretty sure it was brought up before there. I'd check with
them...
https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/141
https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/143
But I am afraid not
On Thu, 2012-12-06 at 02:57 -0500, Bohuslav Kabrda wrote:
Packaging two parallel versions of interpreters brings not only the
burden of maintaining them, but also the work to make them not
conflict. E.g. renaming binaries, checking shebangs all the time, etc.
With SCLs, this is much simpler
IMHO use of software collections is a symptom of a badly run organisation
not devoting enough cycles to maintain the software it uses, and hoping
(as in wishful thinking) no problem will go critical before the product
they built on top of those collections is end-of-lifed
I completely fail to see
2012/12/5 Matthew Miller mat...@fedoraproject.org:
There is a perpetual problem facing all Linux distributions around how fast
to move with software updates. In Fedora, of course, our default speed is
petal-to-the-metal. This is part of who we are and why we are awesome.
However, it also
On Thu, 2012-12-06 at 15:30 +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
IMHO use of software collections is a symptom of a badly run organisation
not devoting enough cycles to maintain the software it uses, and hoping
(as in wishful thinking) no problem will go critical before the product
they built on top
Le mercredi 05 décembre 2012 à 22:25 -0600, Michael Ekstrand a écrit :
On 12/05/2012 03:06 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
Matthew Miller (mat...@fedoraproject.org) said:
Three things:
1) Fedora is big enough that we have concrete situations where one size
doesn't fit all. Puppet being
On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 10:06 AM, Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.comwrote:
On Thu, 2012-12-06 at 15:30 +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
IMHO use of software collections is a symptom of a badly run organisation
not devoting enough cycles to maintain the software it uses, and hoping
(as in
On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 03:30:32PM +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
IMHO use of software collections is a symptom of a badly run organisation
not devoting enough cycles to maintain the software it uses, and hoping
(as in wishful thinking) no problem will go critical before the product
they built
- Original Message -
From: Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mail...@laposte.net
To: Development discussions related to Fedora
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Sent: Thursday, December 6, 2012 4:30:32 PM
Subject: Re: What would it take to make Software Collections work in Fedora?
IMHO use of
On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 10:50:03AM -0500, Mark Bidewell wrote:
I used to use Fedora as my primary OS (Now I use a Mac). The major issue
which drove me away and which I believe SC would help to solve is that with
the current dependency model is that it becomes I want a new version of
On 6. 12. 2012 at 10:50:03, Mark Bidewell wrote:
On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 10:06 AM, Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.comwrote:
On Thu, 2012-12-06 at 15:30 +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
IMHO use of software collections is a symptom of a badly run
organisation
not devoting enough cycles to
- Original Message -
From: Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.com
To: Development discussions related to Fedora
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Sent: Thursday, December 6, 2012 5:06:04 PM
Subject: Re: What would it take to make Software Collections work in Fedora?
On Thu, 2012-12-06 at
On Thu, 6 Dec 2012, Jan Zelený wrote:
Well, not exactly, you would still need to upgrade all packages that the new
version of Libreoffice depends on and all packages these updated packages depend
on and so on ... The only difference is that these updated packages would need
to be a part of
- Original Message -
From: Mark Bidewell mbide...@gmail.com
To: Development discussions related to Fedora
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Sent: Thursday, December 6, 2012 5:50:03 PM
Subject: Re: What would it take to make Software Collections work in Fedora?
On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at
On 6. 12. 2012 at 11:08:43, Seth Vidal wrote:
On Thu, 6 Dec 2012, Jan Zelený wrote:
Well, not exactly, you would still need to upgrade all packages that the
new version of Libreoffice depends on and all packages these updated
packages depend on and so on ... The only difference is that
On Thu, 6 Dec 2012, Jan Zelený wrote:
The original use case for SCLs is to provide a way to deliver newer versions
of SW in stable distributions like RHEL/CentOS than those available in the
core system and make sure system packages and collection packages don't
collide in any way (names,
Quoting Adam Williamson (2012-12-06 16:06:04)
On the other hand, we've been proselytizing the Java heretics for over a
decade now, and the Ruby ones for a while, and neither shows any signs
of conversion or just plain going away, so we may have to call it an
ecumenical matter and deal with
And _maintain_ them, with all security fixes.
The problem with duplication is above all one of scalability of
maintenance.
- Original Message -
From: Aleksandar Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com
To: Development discussions related to Fedora
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Sent: Thursday,
Note that two versions of a product that is already being maintained anyway
could be a candidate, but of course this is something _for_ the OS, not
part of it (RHEL, not Fedora in the exemple I have in mind).
- Original Message -
From: Fernando Nasser fnas...@redhat.com
To:
On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 10:50 AM, Mark Bidewell mbide...@gmail.com wrote:
I used to use Fedora as my primary OS (Now I use a Mac). The major issue
which drove me away and which I believe SC would help to solve is that with
the current dependency model is that it becomes I want a new version of
So the point of view on SC matters.
If you live the EL/EPEL world and have some Fedora, SC make a lot of sense.
If you only use Fedora, Fedora moves fast enough to likely not have a ton
of use for them. I think that's been hit.
As for Puppet, I've proposed several ideas on how to improve
- Original Message -
On Thu, 2012-12-06 at 02:57 -0500, Bohuslav Kabrda wrote:
Packaging two parallel versions of interpreters brings not only the
burden of maintaining them, but also the work to make them not
conflict. E.g. renaming binaries, checking shebangs all the time,
etc.
- Original Message -
From: Matthew Miller mat...@fedoraproject.org
To: Fedora Development List devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Sent: Wednesday, December 5, 2012 6:17:56 PM
Subject: What would it take to make Software Collections work in Fedora?
There is a perpetual problem facing all
On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 11:17 AM, Matthew Miller
mat...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
So, some Red Hat folks have developed an idea called Software Collections
http://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora_Contributor_Documentation/1/html/Software_Collections_Guide/index.html
which is aimed at this
On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 02:40:15PM -0500, Jared K. Smith wrote:
Given the short shelf-life of a Fedora release and the complication
involved in Software Collections, I'm still not convinced that we
really need this in Fedora. Can you give me a concrete case where
Fedora really needs to be
Matthew Miller (mat...@fedoraproject.org) said:
Three things:
1) Fedora is big enough that we have concrete situations where one size
doesn't fit all. Puppet being broken on F17 (and probably F18 as well)
is a fine example of something within the distro itself. And, as a
platform
On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 04:06:38PM -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote:
1) Fedora is big enough that we have concrete situations where one size
doesn't fit all. Puppet being broken on F17 (and probably F18 as well)
is a fine example of something within the distro itself. And, as a
On Wed, 5 Dec 2012 16:04:16 -0500
Matthew Miller mat...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
Three things:
1) Fedora is big enough that we have concrete situations where one
size doesn't fit all. Puppet being broken on F17 (and probably F18 as
well) is a fine example of something within the distro
On 12/05/2012 04:04 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
2) On a long-lived platform, Software Collections can provide a way to move
faster than the base. On a fast-moving platform like Fedora, we could use
it in the other way: providing longer-lived versions of certain
components even as the
On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 4:14 PM, Kevin Fenzi ke...@scrye.com wrote:
I think this tells us more about puppet than Fedora actually. ;(
I couldn't have said it better than this myself.
The biggest reason people are really pushing for software collections
(at least from what little I've seen them
On 5 December 2012 14:50, Jared K. Smith jsm...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 4:14 PM, Kevin Fenzi ke...@scrye.com wrote:
I think this tells us more about puppet than Fedora actually. ;(
I couldn't have said it better than this myself.
The biggest reason people are really
On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 16:10 -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 04:06:38PM -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote:
1) Fedora is big enough that we have concrete situations where one size
doesn't fit all. Puppet being broken on F17 (and probably F18 as well)
is a fine example
On 5 December 2012 15:07, Simo Sorce s...@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 16:10 -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 04:06:38PM -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote:
1) Fedora is big enough that we have concrete situations where one size
doesn't fit all. Puppet being
On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 15:14 -0700, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
On 5 December 2012 15:07, Simo Sorce s...@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 16:10 -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 04:06:38PM -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote:
1) Fedora is big enough that we have
On 5 December 2012 15:35, Simo Sorce s...@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 15:14 -0700, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
On 5 December 2012 15:07, Simo Sorce s...@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 16:10 -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 04:06:38PM -0500, Bill
On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 15:47 -0700, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
Would that not cause a combinatoric nightmare with having to make sure
you had a libX11 compiled against say X number of glibc's or other
libraries that changed in the past so that you had the correct path so
that SC KDE-4.9 had
On 5 December 2012 15:56, Simo Sorce s...@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 15:47 -0700, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
Would that not cause a combinatoric nightmare with having to make sure
you had a libX11 compiled against say X number of glibc's or other
libraries that changed in the
On 12/05/2012 04:06 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
Matthew Miller (mat...@fedoraproject.org) said:
Three things:
1) Fedora is big enough that we have concrete situations where one size
doesn't fit all. Puppet being broken on F17 (and probably F18 as well)
is a fine example of something
On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 16:09 -0700, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
On 5 December 2012 15:56, Simo Sorce s...@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 15:47 -0700, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
Would that not cause a combinatoric nightmare with having to make sure
you had a libX11 compiled against
Hi
On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 4:04 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
1) Fedora is big enough that we have concrete situations where one size
doesn't fit all. Puppet being broken on F17 (and probably F18 as well)
is a fine example of something within the distro itself. And, as a
platform for
On 12/05/2012 03:06 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
Matthew Miller (mat...@fedoraproject.org) said:
Three things:
1) Fedora is big enough that we have concrete situations where one size
doesn't fit all. Puppet being broken on F17 (and probably F18 as well)
is a fine example of something
On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 22:25 -0600, Michael Ekstrand wrote:
On 12/05/2012 03:06 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
Matthew Miller (mat...@fedoraproject.org) said:
Three things:
1) Fedora is big enough that we have concrete situations where one size
doesn't fit all. Puppet being broken on F17
On 5. 12. 2012 at 11:17:56, Matthew Miller wrote:
There is a perpetual problem facing all Linux distributions around how fast
to move with software updates. In Fedora, of course, our default speed is
petal-to-the-metal. This is part of who we are and why we are awesome.
However, it also
On 5. 12. 2012 at 16:50:03, Jared K. Smith wrote:
On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 4:14 PM, Kevin Fenzi ke...@scrye.com wrote:
I think this tells us more about puppet than Fedora actually. ;(
I couldn't have said it better than this myself.
The biggest reason people are really pushing for software
On Thu, 6 Dec 2012, Jan Zelený wrote:
Hi,
I guess the main reason why SCL is not used in Fedora it requires a certain
(potentially non-trivial) amount of work from package maintainer.
However feel free to make your packages SCL enabled. You shouldn't have any
issues with that. Just make
- Original Message -
Hi
On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 4:04 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
1) Fedora is big enough that we have concrete situations where one
size
doesn't fit all. Puppet being broken on F17 (and probably F18 as
well)
is a fine example of something within the distro
84 matches
Mail list logo
