Langdon White wrote:
> ## What we can do going forward:
> * Increase the awareness of the policies for Fedora Modules
> * Investigate an "early warning system" that would indicate to packagers
> (modular and RPM) when they might be violating this policy
> * Request dnf notify the user when they are enabling a superseding rpm
> from a default stream module
> * Request dnf provide an indication of what module is providing a
> particular rpm (e.g. `dnf provides protobuf` not just indicate repo origin
> but also module name and stream)
* Stop allowing default module streams, which are the main reason this was
allowed to happen, and which are just asking for this kind of conflicts.
Kevin Kofler
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
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/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
