Re: Per-Product Config file divergence

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

 



On Mon, 2014-03-10 at 11:31 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:

> > And I think those subpackages probably _should_ conflict, don't you?
> >
> 
> Depends.  Sgallagh had a desire to mark that a particular system
> implemented multiple products (ie server that also had workstation
> installed).  I'm not sure that's a good idea but if we did go that route
> then we'd have to be able to support that with our identifiers.
> Subpackages that conflict wouldn't be flexible enough to handle that.

Just for the more-public-record, I remain pretty sure this is a bad idea
and don't think we should allow it. You should always be considered to
be running exactly 0 or 1 Products. I think we should consider how to
allow things like 'run a desktop on the Server product', but that
shouldn't be conceived as 'run Workstation on Server'.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
http://www.happyassassin.net

-- 
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct





[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]
  Powered by Linux