On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 6:16 PM, stan <stanl-fedorau...@vfemail.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Aug 2017 07:51:57 +0200 > Michal Novotny <cl...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > I guess I am missing something but I don't see how modularity adds > > flexibility. rpm, yum repos, ansible, dnf seem to be quite flexible > > even now and having that + something else on top seems to be less > > flexible. I am just speaking my mind here. > > I'm not involved in modularity, and I'm speaking as an observer. But > it seems that it would be a lot more effective to put the libraries in > containers, and keep applications in rpms. > > That is, say there is a python container, and it contains the various > formats of python, 2.6, 2.7, 3.5, 3.6, etc. Then any application that > needs python just specifies the python it needs, and the OS links it > with the proper library from the container when it runs. > We would need to develop a dedicated, non-trivial tooling to enable this functionality. And honestly, I can't even imagine how this could be even possible to implement for all ecosystems (compiled languages, interpreted languages). Tomas
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
