Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> I was hoping to have some of the folks who would be saddled with tons
> more work if this policy was enacted chime in, but I don't think any of
> them have. (ie, the people who have moved their packages to modules and
> have or are going to retire their non modular versions). We may want to
> ask them directly what they would do if this policy is enacted.
It is their own fault that they did this controversial move despite the
objections we have been uttering from day one. So they only have themselves
to blame for any extra work. It will teach them an important lesson to not
jump the gun.
That said, judging from Fabio's reply, there probably won't even be that
much extra work, just a handful packages to sync ("git merge") from the
modular branches to the regular ("ursine") ones and "fedpkg build" there.
The current Eclipse FTBFS in non-modular F31 is also a non-issue for this
proposal, because it is exclusively caused by dependencies having become
module-only, so requiring them to have a default non-modular ("ursine")
version will also instantly fix non-modular Eclipse.
Kevin Kofler
_______________________________________________
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]
