On Thu, Jun 24, 2021 at 9:09 AM Remi Collet <Fedora(a)famillecollet.com> wrote:
Le 23/06/2021 à 10:57, Nico Kadel-Garcia a écrit :
> I can't find *anyone* who likes modularity.
I like modules !
BTW
Community have killed SCL
Community is killing modules
Software Collections made the assumption that packager ergonomics did
not matter. That is obviously patently false. Today, I could probably
come up with an implementation of SCLs that is more packager-friendly
by leveraging the existing abstractions in RPM and macros. We actually
do this for Flatpak builds, so it's not a foreign concept.
Conceptually, I like modules. However, after doing work to implement
modularity in a build system, I want a better version of it. I'm not
sure that will happen anytime soon, though.
EPEL-8 is IMHO partially broken,
and perhaps should be consider as dead.
> I'm devoutly hoping that it is discarded for RHEL 9.
I rather hope than EPEL-9 will be better
and available for "Beta" time.
Remi
P.S. yes, I'm really disappointed by how Fedora evolves,
not being able to use a proper build system (modules aware)
in 2 years, while everyone else seems to be able to
do it quite shortly (CentOS, Alma, Rocky, Oracle...)
The amount of cursing I've heard from the developers of all of those
distributions over the modularity implementation should not be
ignored. Every one of those did it because Red Hat did it, and I've
advised a fair number of them on how to do it. At least one of them
considered deviating from RHEL to get rid of it because the
implementation is terrible.
Among distribution tooling developers, the current modularity
implementation is nearly universally hated. It makes assumptions about
what kind of access the build system has, is deeply tied into
Koji+MBS, has poor local build support, and the modulemd formats
weren't designed for outside use in mind (assumptions around dist-git,
commitish, direct access to cherry-pick from Koji, etc.).
--
真実はいつも一つ!/ Always, there's only one truth!