[CentOS-devel] A Big Idea for a New Decade [was: Minutes for CentOS Board of Directors 2019-12-18 Meeting]

Nico Kadel-Garcia

nkadel at gmail.com
Fri Jan 10 01:54:22 UTC 2020

On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 10:55 AM Matthew Miller <mattdm at mattdm.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 08, 2020 at 06:35:13AM -0500, Kaleb Keithley wrote:
> > How is that different than just building them in EPEL and being done with
> > it.
> >
> > Has something changed in the EPEL rules that would now allow us to ship
> > packages that conflict with the packages in base RHEL or a RHEL product
> > like RHGS (GlusterFS) or RHCS (Ceph)?
> Yes -- this should be possible with modularity. You'd ship the conflicting
> packages as an alternate stream. No default streams allowed, but people could
> opt in. And presumably there could exist media where that stream is enabled
> by default.

Since modularity has been pretty firmly proven not to work, both for
RHEL 8 and in Fedora, why would you even consider  relying on it. It's
already preven a destabilizing influence in RHEL and CentOS 8 and
pretty much discarded for Fedora 32. The current chafing example in
RHEL  8 and CentPS 8 is Perl dependencies, but they keep happening.
I've not yet seen any hint that they will be any significant part of
Fedora 32.

More information about the CentOS-devel mailing list