On 04/03/13 02:51 PM, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
On Thu, 2012-12-06 at 07:06 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Thu, 2012-12-06 at 15:30 +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
IMHO use of software collections is a symptom of a badly run organisation
not devoting enough cycles to maintain the software it uses,
On Mon, 2013-03-04 at 22:51 +, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
(following up with more thoughts from the distutils-sig thread)
> It started here:
>
> http://mail.python.org/pipermail/distutils-sig/2013-February/020030.html
>
> and now we're talking about Software Collections here:
>
> http://ma
I'll interject my thoughts here (speaking just for myself):
I think software collections are a great thing for us to provide
tooling for and make easy for our users/consumers to use.
That said, I don't think Fedora as a distribution should ever ship any
of them. The tools/framework/etc, great.
Hi,
I find it sad that people are still arguing for the developer-oriented "I
only care about making application Y as easy to maintain on a wide variety
of platforms as possible", and dismiss sysadmin security concerns as too
inconvenient to follow, at the very same time one of the biggest
propone
- Original Message -
> On Thu, 2012-12-06 at 07:06 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Thu, 2012-12-06 at 15:30 +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> > > IMHO use of software collections is a symptom of a badly run
> > > organisation
> > > not devoting enough cycles to maintain the software it u
wards compat [was Re: What would it
> take to make Software Collections work in Fedora?]
> Date: Mon, 04 Mar 2013 22:51:31 +
>
> On Thu, 2012-12-06 at 07:06 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Thu, 2012-12-06 at 15:30 +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> > > IMHO use of s
On Thu, 2012-12-06 at 07:06 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-12-06 at 15:30 +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> > IMHO use of software collections is a symptom of a badly run organisation
> > not devoting enough cycles to maintain the software it uses, and hoping
> > (as in wishful thinking
On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 10:06 AM, Fernando Nasser wrote:
> What is the difficult on adding a file to yum.repo.d ?
>
> It is designed for that. Each initial page for an aditional repo would
> have instructions on how to activate it and provide a repo file to copy
> from.
The difficulty is that,
Message -
> From: "Emmanuel Seyman"
> To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2012 6:23:36 PM
> Subject: Re: For Fedora vs. In Fedora [Was: What would it take to make
> Software Collections work in Fedora?]
>
> * Fernando Nasser [11/12/2
On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 07:33:13PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> What I'm confused about is how this would work in terms of Fedora
> policy (not in terms of the software).
Yes, that's important to cover too.
> Let's say that we decided that OCaml was non-core. It would be in a
> collection,
velopment discussions related to Fedora"
>
> Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2012 4:42:39 PM
> Subject: Re: What would it take to make Software Collections work in Fedora?
>
> On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 03:18:42PM -0500, Fernando Nasser wrote:
> > > From: "Richard
* Fernando Nasser [11/12/2012 23:05] :
>
> As we have EPEL _for_ RHEL we can have things _for_ Fedora as opposed
> to _in_ Fedora. It is how several VARs do with their software _for_
> RHEL in the Red Hat world.
We already have third party repositories for Fedora.
Emmanuel
--
devel mailing list
On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 03:18:42PM -0500, Fernando Nasser wrote:
> > From: "Richard W.M. Jones"
> > So let's say the user has to add the OCaml repo themselves. That's
> > difficult for the user because lots of tools like "yum search" no
> > longer work well.
> >
>
> Really? If I add several yu
Hi all,
As we have EPEL _for_ RHEL we can have things _for_ Fedora as opposed
to _in_ Fedora. It is how several VARs do with their software _for_
RHEL in the Red Hat world.
Some years ago JPackage.org had a yum repo with JBoss AS (community
version) that was tailored to be installed in Fedora.
see in line
- Original Message -
> From: "Richard W.M. Jones"
> To: "Development discussions related to Fedora"
>
> Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2012 2:33:13 PM
> Subject: Re: What would it take to make Software Collections work in Fedora?
>
>
On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 01:02:41PM -0500, Jon Masters wrote:
> I'd love LSB to matter more. But I didn't raise that can of worms
> intentionally :) To drill down to a single point though, as I said
> above, I don't want the distro to ship every piece of software I might
> use. Today, there is too m
On 12/11/2012 01:09 PM, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
Yeah, our "how to join Fedora" process makes it easiest to start by
adding to the number of packages instead of by adding to the quality
of existing packages. It might be beneficial to have things the other
way - if someone could find a practical way
On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 7:02 PM, Jon Masters wrote:
> I'd love LSB to matter more. But I didn't raise that can of worms
> intentionally :) To drill down to a single point though, as I said
> above, I don't want the distro to ship every piece of software I might
> use. Today, there is too much of a
On 12/09/2012 03:32 PM, Michael Scherer wrote:
> Having one repo and refusing commercial software are 2 different issues.
Really, they're not though. The problem is that stuff is shipped
in-distro and builds deps on core packages, and those packages are
revved in a symbiotic relationship with t
2012/12/10 Miloslav Trmač :
> On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 5:17 PM, Matthew Miller
> wrote:
>> I think, though, that this tool, integrated well and supported, could really
>> help us in Fedora (and in EPEL). So, I'd like to
>>
>> a) enumerate the problems with Software Collections in Fedora,
>
> Nicola
On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 5:17 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> I think, though, that this tool, integrated well and supported, could really
> help us in Fedora (and in EPEL). So, I'd like to
>
> a) enumerate the problems with Software Collections in Fedora,
Nicolas's mail has covered the "single package
Le dimanche 09 décembre 2012 à 14:26 -0500, Jon Masters a écrit :
> On 12/06/2012 10:38 AM, Michael Scherer wrote:
>
> > People are annoyed to go to different bugzilla to report bugs, people
> > are annoyed to go to different shops to shop for stuff ( as seen by the
> > success of amazon, or even
On 12/06/2012 10:38 AM, Michael Scherer wrote:
> People are annoyed to go to different bugzilla to report bugs, people
> are annoyed to go to different shops to shop for stuff ( as seen by the
> success of amazon, or even itunes, etc ), so why would it make sense to
> have a different way dependin
On 12/07/2012 12:30 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 10:40:13AM -0500, Jon Masters wrote:
>>> We could draw them between Core and Extras!
>> :) Note that just because we got rid of Core doesn't mean that it was a
>> bad idea. Ubuntu even adopted a "Core" of their own a while back
Marcela Mašláňová (mmasl...@redhat.com) said:
> >You're using a Mac now, so good luck.
> >
> >But I'm pretty sure that software collections would not have helped
> >you to upgrade Libreoffice. Which, by the way, is possible without
> >upgrading everything: just compile the later SRPMs. In other
On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 05:49:24PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> I think the real lesson is that platforms should take backwards
> compatibility more seriously. The single best decision that libvirt
> has ever made was to promise to support the libvirt API and ABI
> forever. If you wrote a p
On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 12:49 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> I think the real lesson is that platforms should take backwards
> compatibility more seriously. The single best decision that libvirt
> has ever made was to promise to support the libvirt API and ABI
> forever. If you wrote a program a
On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 10:54:46AM +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> In my previous job, we were developing application for our internal
> customer. During development, we were free to use any library which
> suited our needs. However, in some point, our customer was satisfied
> with functionality he had
On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 10:40:13AM -0500, Jon Masters wrote:
> > We could draw them between Core and Extras!
> :) Note that just because we got rid of Core doesn't mean that it was a
> bad idea. Ubuntu even adopted a "Core" of their own a while back. Maybe
The bad idea was the insider-vs-outsider
On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 02:08:28AM -0500, Bohuslav Kabrda wrote:
> I don't think I fully understand your question here. Every SCL is confined
> in its own root under /opt/.../name/root. So you can either do two SCLs,
^^^
Or wherever we decide is the appropriate place -- I t
On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 10:40 AM, Jon Masters wrote:
> On 12/06/2012 01:00 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 22:25 -0600, Michael Ekstrand wrote:
> >> On 12/05/2012 03:06 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> >>> Matthew Miller (mat...@fedoraproject.org) said:
> Three things:
>
On 12/06/2012 01:00 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 22:25 -0600, Michael Ekstrand wrote:
>> On 12/05/2012 03:06 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
>>> Matthew Miller (mat...@fedoraproject.org) said:
Three things:
1) Fedora is big enough that we have concrete situations wh
On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 4:04 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> 3) It's the ecosystem. If using Software Collections on RHEL is good for
>your company, it's good for it to work on Fedora, because a) we're the
>upstream and problems get worked out here, b) development resources
>benefit Fedora
On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 6:39 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> Dne 5.12.2012 22:14, Kevin Fenzi napsal(a):
>
>> I cant seem to find any specific fpc ticket where they discussed this,
>> but I am pretty sure it was brought up before there. I'd check with
>> them...
>
>
> https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/1
On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 8:55 AM, Radek Vokal wrote:
> On 12/06/2012 07:00 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 22:25 -0600, Michael Ekstrand wrote:
>>
>>> On 12/05/2012 03:06 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
>>>
Matthew Miller (mat...@fedoraproject.org) said:
> Three thing
On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 8:55 AM, Radek Vokal wrote:
> On 12/06/2012 07:00 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 22:25 -0600, Michael Ekstrand wrote:
>>
>>> On 12/05/2012 03:06 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
>>>
Matthew Miller (mat...@fedoraproject.org) said:
> Three thing
On 12/06/2012 07:00 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 22:25 -0600, Michael Ekstrand wrote:
On 12/05/2012 03:06 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
Matthew Miller (mat...@fedoraproject.org) said:
Three things:
1) Fedora is big enough that we have concrete situations where one size
do
- Original Message -
> From: "Vít Ondruch"
> To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Sent: Friday, December 7, 2012 11:54:46 AM
> Subject: Re: What would it take to make Software Collections work in Fedora?
>
> Dne 6.12.2012 17:31, Seth Vidal napsal(a):
> &
Fernando Nasser a écrit:
> And _maintain_ them, with all security fixes.
>
> The problem with duplication is above all one of scalability of
> maintenance.
Please, avoiding top-posting like this would be very welcome here.
Otherwise, it is quite hard to know what you are replying to exactly.
Th
Dne 6.12.2012 17:31, Seth Vidal napsal(a):
On Thu, 6 Dec 2012, Jan Zelený wrote:
The original use case for SCLs is to provide a way to deliver newer
versions
of SW in stable distributions like RHEL/CentOS than those available
in the
core system and make sure system packages and collectio
On 12/06/2012 05:08 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 10:50:03AM -0500, Mark Bidewell wrote:
I used to use Fedora as my primary OS (Now I use a Mac). The major issue
which drove me away and which I believe SC would help to solve is that with
the current dependency model is t
- Original Message -
> On Thu, 2012-12-06 at 02:57 -0500, Bohuslav Kabrda wrote:
> > Packaging two parallel versions of interpreters brings not only the
> > burden of maintaining them, but also the work to make them not
> > conflict. E.g. renaming binaries, checking shebangs all the time,
>
So the point of view on SC matters.
If you live the EL/EPEL world and have some Fedora, SC make a lot of sense.
If you only use Fedora, Fedora moves fast enough to likely not have a ton
of use for them. I think that's been hit.
As for Puppet, I've proposed several ideas on how to improve Puppet
On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 10:50 AM, Mark Bidewell wrote:
> I used to use Fedora as my primary OS (Now I use a Mac). The major issue
> which drove me away and which I believe SC would help to solve is that with
> the current dependency model is that it becomes I want a new version of
> Libreoffice so
To: "Development discussions related to Fedora"
>
> Sent: Thursday, December 6, 2012 11:44:27 AM
> Subject: Re: What would it take to make Software Collections work in Fedora?
>
> And _maintain_ them, with all security fixes.
>
> The problem with duplication i
er 6, 2012 11:14:01 AM
> Subject: Re: What would it take to make Software Collections work in Fedora?
>
> - Original Message -
> > From: "Mark Bidewell"
> > To: "Development discussions related to Fedora"
> >
> > Sent: Thursday, Decembe
Quoting Adam Williamson (2012-12-06 16:06:04)
> On the other hand, we've been proselytizing the Java heretics for over a
> decade now, and the Ruby ones for a while, and neither shows any signs
> of conversion or just plain going away, so we may have to call it an
> ecumenical matter and deal with
On Thu, 6 Dec 2012, Jan Zelený wrote:
The original use case for SCLs is to provide a way to deliver newer versions
of SW in stable distributions like RHEL/CentOS than those available in the
core system and make sure system packages and collection packages don't
collide in any way (names, lib
On 6. 12. 2012 at 11:08:43, Seth Vidal wrote:
> On Thu, 6 Dec 2012, Jan Zelený wrote:
> > Well, not exactly, you would still need to upgrade all packages that the
> > new version of Libreoffice depends on and all packages these updated
> > packages depend on and so on ... The only difference is tha
- Original Message -
> From: "Mark Bidewell"
> To: "Development discussions related to Fedora"
>
> Sent: Thursday, December 6, 2012 5:50:03 PM
> Subject: Re: What would it take to make Software Collections work in Fedora?
>
>
> On T
On Thu, 6 Dec 2012, Jan Zelený wrote:
Well, not exactly, you would still need to upgrade all packages that the new
version of Libreoffice depends on and all packages these updated packages depend
on and so on ... The only difference is that these updated packages would need
to be a part of t
- Original Message -
> From: "Adam Williamson"
> To: "Development discussions related to Fedora"
>
> Sent: Thursday, December 6, 2012 5:06:04 PM
> Subject: Re: What would it take to make Software Collections work in Fedora?
>
> On Thu, 2012-12
On 6. 12. 2012 at 10:50:03, Mark Bidewell wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 10:06 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Thu, 2012-12-06 at 15:30 +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> > > IMHO use of software collections is a symptom of a badly run
> > > organisation
> > > not devoting enough cycles to maintain
On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 10:50:03AM -0500, Mark Bidewell wrote:
> I used to use Fedora as my primary OS (Now I use a Mac). The major issue
> which drove me away and which I believe SC would help to solve is that with
> the current dependency model is that it becomes I want a new version of
> Libreo
- Original Message -
> From: "Nicolas Mailhot"
> To: "Development discussions related to Fedora"
>
> Sent: Thursday, December 6, 2012 4:30:32 PM
> Subject: Re: What would it take to make Software Collections work in Fedora?
>
> IMHO use of sof
On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 03:30:32PM +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> IMHO use of software collections is a symptom of a badly run organisation
> not devoting enough cycles to maintain the software it uses, and hoping
> (as in wishful thinking) no problem will go critical before the product
> they bui
On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 10:06 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-12-06 at 15:30 +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> > IMHO use of software collections is a symptom of a badly run organisation
> > not devoting enough cycles to maintain the software it uses, and hoping
> > (as in wishful thinking)
Le mercredi 05 décembre 2012 à 22:25 -0600, Michael Ekstrand a écrit :
> On 12/05/2012 03:06 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> > Matthew Miller (mat...@fedoraproject.org) said:
> >> Three things:
> >>
> >> 1) Fedora is big enough that we have concrete situations where one size
> >>doesn't fit all.
On Thu, 2012-12-06 at 15:30 +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> IMHO use of software collections is a symptom of a badly run organisation
> not devoting enough cycles to maintain the software it uses, and hoping
> (as in wishful thinking) no problem will go critical before the product
> they built on t
2012/12/5 Matthew Miller :
> There is a perpetual problem facing all Linux distributions around how fast
> to move with software updates. In Fedora, of course, our default speed is
> petal-to-the-metal. This is part of who we are and why we are awesome.
> However, it also sometimes makes life diffi
IMHO use of software collections is a symptom of a badly run organisation
not devoting enough cycles to maintain the software it uses, and hoping
(as in wishful thinking) no problem will go critical before the product
they built on top of those collections is end-of-lifed
I completely fail to see
On Thu, 2012-12-06 at 02:57 -0500, Bohuslav Kabrda wrote:
> Packaging two parallel versions of interpreters brings not only the
> burden of maintaining them, but also the work to make them not
> conflict. E.g. renaming binaries, checking shebangs all the time, etc.
> With SCLs, this is much simpler
Dne 5.12.2012 22:14, Kevin Fenzi napsal(a):
I cant seem to find any specific fpc ticket where they discussed this,
but I am pretty sure it was brought up before there. I'd check with
them...
https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/141
https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/143
But I am afraid not eve
- Original Message -
> Hi
> On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 4:04 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> > 1) Fedora is big enough that we have concrete situations where one
> > size
>
> > doesn't fit all. Puppet being broken on F17 (and probably F18 as
> > well)
>
> > is a fine example of something within
On Thu, 6 Dec 2012, Jan Zelený wrote:
Hi,
I guess the main reason why SCL is not used in Fedora it requires a certain
(potentially non-trivial) amount of work from package maintainer.
However feel free to make your packages SCL enabled. You shouldn't have any
issues with that. Just make nec
On 5. 12. 2012 at 16:50:03, Jared K. Smith wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 4:14 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > I think this tells us more about puppet than Fedora actually. ;(
>
> I couldn't have said it better than this myself.
>
> The biggest reason people are really pushing for software collections
On 5. 12. 2012 at 11:17:56, Matthew Miller wrote:
> There is a perpetual problem facing all Linux distributions around how fast
> to move with software updates. In Fedora, of course, our default speed is
> petal-to-the-metal. This is part of who we are and why we are awesome.
> However, it also som
On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 22:25 -0600, Michael Ekstrand wrote:
> On 12/05/2012 03:06 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> > Matthew Miller (mat...@fedoraproject.org) said:
> >> Three things:
> >>
> >> 1) Fedora is big enough that we have concrete situations where one size
> >>doesn't fit all. Puppet being
On 12/05/2012 03:06 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> Matthew Miller (mat...@fedoraproject.org) said:
>> Three things:
>>
>> 1) Fedora is big enough that we have concrete situations where one size
>>doesn't fit all. Puppet being broken on F17 (and probably F18 as well)
>>is a fine example of so
Hi
On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 4:04 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> 1) Fedora is big enough that we have concrete situations where one size
>doesn't fit all. Puppet being broken on F17 (and probably F18 as well)
>is a fine example of something within the distro itself. And, as a
>platform for
On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 16:09 -0700, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> On 5 December 2012 15:56, Simo Sorce wrote:
> > On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 15:47 -0700, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> >> Would that not cause a combinatoric nightmare with having to make sure
> >> you had a libX11 compiled against say X n
On 12/05/2012 04:06 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> Matthew Miller (mat...@fedoraproject.org) said:
>> Three things:
>>
>> 1) Fedora is big enough that we have concrete situations where one size
>>doesn't fit all. Puppet being broken on F17 (and probably F18 as well)
>>is a fine example of so
On 5 December 2012 15:56, Simo Sorce wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 15:47 -0700, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
>> Would that not cause a combinatoric nightmare with having to make sure
>> you had a libX11 compiled against say X number of glibc's or other
>> libraries that changed in the past so that
On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 15:47 -0700, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> Would that not cause a combinatoric nightmare with having to make sure
> you had a libX11 compiled against say X number of glibc's or other
> libraries that changed in the past so that you had the correct path so
> that SC KDE-4.9 had
On 5 December 2012 15:35, Simo Sorce wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 15:14 -0700, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
>> On 5 December 2012 15:07, Simo Sorce wrote:
>> > On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 16:10 -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
>> >> On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 04:06:38PM -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote:
>> >> >
On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 15:14 -0700, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> On 5 December 2012 15:07, Simo Sorce wrote:
> > On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 16:10 -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
> >> On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 04:06:38PM -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> >> > > 1) Fedora is big enough that we have concrete sit
On 5 December 2012 15:07, Simo Sorce wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 16:10 -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 04:06:38PM -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote:
>> > > 1) Fedora is big enough that we have concrete situations where one size
>> > >doesn't fit all. Puppet being broken o
On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 16:10 -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 04:06:38PM -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> > > 1) Fedora is big enough that we have concrete situations where one size
> > >doesn't fit all. Puppet being broken on F17 (and probably F18 as well)
> > >is a fin
On 5 December 2012 14:50, Jared K. Smith wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 4:14 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>> I think this tells us more about puppet than Fedora actually. ;(
>
> I couldn't have said it better than this myself.
>
> The biggest reason people are really pushing for software collections
>
On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 4:14 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> I think this tells us more about puppet than Fedora actually. ;(
I couldn't have said it better than this myself.
The biggest reason people are really pushing for software collections
(at least from what little I've seen them discussed publicl
On 12/05/2012 04:04 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
2) On a long-lived platform, Software Collections can provide a way to move
faster than the base. On a fast-moving platform like Fedora, we could use
it in the other way: providing longer-lived versions of certain
components even as the b
On Wed, 5 Dec 2012 16:04:16 -0500
Matthew Miller wrote:
> Three things:
>
> 1) Fedora is big enough that we have concrete situations where one
> size doesn't fit all. Puppet being broken on F17 (and probably F18 as
> well) is a fine example of something within the distro itself. And,
> as a plat
On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 04:06:38PM -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> > 1) Fedora is big enough that we have concrete situations where one size
> >doesn't fit all. Puppet being broken on F17 (and probably F18 as well)
> >is a fine example of something within the distro itself. And, as a
> >
Matthew Miller (mat...@fedoraproject.org) said:
> Three things:
>
> 1) Fedora is big enough that we have concrete situations where one size
>doesn't fit all. Puppet being broken on F17 (and probably F18 as well)
>is a fine example of something within the distro itself. And, as a
>plat
On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 02:40:15PM -0500, Jared K. Smith wrote:
> Given the short shelf-life of a Fedora release and the complication
> involved in Software Collections, I'm still not convinced that we
> really need this in Fedora. Can you give me a concrete case where
> Fedora really needs to be
On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 11:17 AM, Matthew Miller
wrote:
> So, some Red Hat folks have developed an idea called Software Collections
> http://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora_Contributor_Documentation/1/html/Software_Collections_Guide/index.html
> which is aimed at this problem -- it lets you ins
- Original Message -
> From: "Matthew Miller"
> To: "Fedora Development List"
> Sent: Wednesday, December 5, 2012 6:17:56 PM
> Subject: What would it take to make Software Collections work in Fedora?
>
> There is a perpetual problem facing all Linu
There is a perpetual problem facing all Linux distributions around how fast
to move with software updates. In Fedora, of course, our default speed is
petal-to-the-metal. This is part of who we are and why we are awesome.
However, it also sometimes makes life difficult for us -- for example, our
Pup
88 matches
Mail list logo
