[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [fab] Non-standard kernels in the Fedora Multiverse



On Wed, 2006-05-10 at 11:08 -0400, Christopher Blizzard wrote:
> Yeah, here's another example of the dichotomy:
> 
> seth vidal wrote:
> > Some complexity in enabling Alternatives:
> >  1. we can't enable alternatives by default - the obsoletes it could
> > allow would eat packages for people who really just want to use core.
> >  2. create a sensible way of dealing with conflicts - something we don't
> > really need to deal with right now.
> 
> Inside of Fedora
> 
> >  3. dealing with alternative tree creation and QA. What if a user
> > creates a fedora 'distro' using an alternatives kernel? How does that
> > impact testing? How do we cope with the near endless number of
> > combination or configurations we might get?
> 
> and creating full Fedora variants.
> 
> What we really need to be focused on is a better comps system. 
> Something that doesn't just know about packages but also knows about 
> repos and replacing some packages with packages from other repositories. 
>   Our current systems are built around "one Fedora to rule them all" and 
> that's just not going to work anymore.
> 

Do we need to be focused on that? It seems like it's a pretty serious
edge case but we need to make sure we have the core case working before
trailing off after edge cases.

-sv



[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]