On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 4:04 PM Petr Pisar <ppi...@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 02:35:13PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 01:50:55PM +0100, Joe Orton wrote:
> >
> > > 4.  The benefit we want to preserve from modules is to maintain packages
> > > with varying expectation of quality, specifically separating the
> > > build-time-only vs runtime dependencies.  e.g. in that case that a web
> > > server like Eclipse Jetty is required as a dep for testing another
> > > component during the build, we want to be able to use and build that
> > > component, without being indefinitely on the hook for security errata.
> > > (The build dependency tree is particularly complex for Maven and
> > > involves many examples of packages with frequent and high severity
> > > vulnerabilies)
> >
> > What are you doing different in terms of supporting deps in the module
> > that reduces the security errata burden, compared to non-modular builds ?
> >
> > It feels like if we have some policy that is creating unsustainable
> > maint burden wrt non-modular packaging, we should re-examine this
> > policy rather than trying to workaround it by going modular, which
> > creates a different kind of maint burden.
> >
> In non-modular Fedora all packages that we have in Fedora build system (Koji)
> are tagged into Fedora repositories and made available to all users on their
> computers for any purpose. That implies that all packages in Fedora build 
> system
> must be fully supported including addressing all security issues.
>
> In modular Fedora that's (effectively) not true. Packages that only exist
> for the sake of building other packages (i.e. build-only dependencies) can be
> retained in the Fedora build system and never left it. That means those
> packages are never made available to Fedora users and thus a service level for
> them is significantly lower. E.g. no security fixes, not bug fixes, no
> integration, not tests, no API/ABI stability. The only requirement is that
> they can be built and used for building other packages.
>
> I wrote that it was not effectively true. There is probably no such policy
> that would de jure allowed lowering the service level for the build-only
> packages. But at the same time there is nobody who could enforce it. Users do
> not have the packages, security team does know about them, they cannot break
> a compose, and they do not intefere with packages from other modules. The only
> place where they are visible is dist-git and Koji. Thus they only need to pass
> a review (a legal requirement).

+1
That is very well put, thanks Petr for explaining it in detail.

>
> -- Petr
> _______________________________________________
> 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
_______________________________________________
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

Reply via email to