A Modularity rethink for Fedora

> In other world, after years of hearing about modularity, we still doesn't know (understand?) how this differs from rpm packages.

I think it's more useful to think of modules in comparison to "comps" groups — what you see with "yum grouplist" — rather than in comparison to RPM. Comps groups compare to RPM in that they are sets of RPMs. Modules are also sets of RPMs.

The important thing is that Modularity gives a way for packagers to easily (with the new design) create multiple version streams for a set of packages, and a way for users to easily consume those different streams. With _just_ RPMs, traditionally, we've done that in ways that don't scale — for example, by creating whole new packages as "package-compat" or "nameversion" as the package name, or SCLs.