Why Modularity Matters to Fedora [was Re: Proposal: Rethink Fedora multilib support (Take Two!)]

On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 11:23:21AM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> Apache httpd and KDE are very interesting examples.  Both KDE and
> Apache httpd integrate with Subversion, on two levels: KDE has
> Subversion client support, Apache httpd has server support.  And
> Subversion is implemented using apr (the Apache Portable Runtime
> library).
> 
> So unless we start building Subversion twice, once for use with
> Apache httpd, and once for use within KDE, modules containing KDE
> and Apache httpd will have to agree on the same version of
> Subversion and the same version of apr.  To cut down support
> overhead, we'd probably want them to use the same versions, too, but
> this might not always be possible (e.g., newer upstream versions may
> have obliterate support, which would be considered an important
> server-side feature, but also change the working copy format, which
> would not be acceptable for a stable desktop release).

Thanks, Florian - that's a great example. This is an area where Fedora,
in our well-meaning attempt to integrate everything, has hobbled
ourselves compared to more focused distributions. A project like Solus
can focus on just the desktop case and doesn't have to care about
Apache as an actual server; a server-only distro can make the opposite
choice. In Fedora right now, someone has to lose. Modularity gives us
flexibility to make a different decision on a case-by-case basis.

-- 
Matthew Miller
<mattdm@fedoraproject.org>
Fedora Project Leader
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org