On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 8:02 PM Matthew Miller <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 04, 2019 at 09:31:55PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: > > Wouldn't it be easier if the "default stream" would just behave like > > a regular package? > > Part of the "hybrid modularity" proposal was that the default stream could > _literally_ be tagged into the base repo as non-modular. That has a lot of > appeal to me still!
To quote you from the other ongoing thread: "The default stream for a package shouldn't be updated in disruptive ways in shipped releases" If that's the case, then what *is* the benefit of abandoning the non-modular version of packages, if default streams need to basically be maintained separately for different branches anyway? 🤔 Fabio > [...] > > We put the default modular stream into our regular repos, similarly > > to what we try to do in the buildroot. "dnf install Foo" would > > install the Foo package and would not enbale any streams or modules. > > The modular maintainers would keep maintaining the modules as now, > > the infrastructure would compose the defaults into the regular repo > > (or an additional but default-enabled one). > > Yeah, like this. :) > > > -- > Matthew Miller > <[email protected]> > Fedora Project Leader > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list -- [email protected] > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] > 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/[email protected] _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] 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/[email protected]
