jasonbrooks added a new comment to an issue you are following:
Some questions from IRC in #atomic
Q: With modularity, how would an ostree tree be composed? Would there need to be something
like modularity-ostree (like rpm-ostree) to compose the tree?
A: Modules are made of RPMs, so something like a new "modularity-ostree" would
not be required, however, module support would need to be added to libdnf in order for
rpm-ostree to understand modules on the client side.
<jbrooks> walters, I've been wondering how modularity would interact with ostree
-- would there be something like a modularity-ostree, or would it fit into the rpm scheme
<dustymabe> jbrooks: you mean modularity-ostree like rpm-ostree ?
<dustymabe> like a tool?
<dustymabe> jbrooks: i don't think so
<dustymabe> at least not to begin with
<jbrooks> Like, I'm trying to imagine how the tree is composed
<jbrooks> does a module act like a mega rpm?
<dustymabe> jbrooks: still going to take some learning on my part but i think for us
module mostly means specific yum repo
<dustymabe> langdon: around?
<dustymabe> jbrooks: langdon might be able to shed some light for us
<dustymabe> i have a meeting in 2 minutes, so mightmiss some of the conversation
* mattdm is here
<langdon> Dustymabe, kinda
<dustymabe> mattdm: \o/
<dustymabe> in terms of atomic host (at least initially) that was my thought on how
it would be set up
<dustymabe> the module defines the rpms (including build reqs)
<dustymabe> and then we compose an ostree from that module
<dustymabe> basically just pointing to the yum repo that gets created as the
* dustymabe has 1-1
<drakonis> the boss man is here
<dustymabe> will read discussion after call
<langdon> Basically, Dusty has the right of it
<langdon> so.. jbrooks think of modules kinda like a x-between a metapackage and a
yum group.. but with "enforcement" on them moving together
<jbrooks> OK, interesting
<langdon> at the EOD the "things that are built" are "just"
rpms.. we decorate with some extra metadata for things like EOL
<jbrooks> So when you install a module, it's sort of like enabling a copr?
<langdon> and.. the module is less bound to its output artifact.. so the artifact is
less coupled to rpm .. you could also build something like a container.. or, someday,
<langdon> jbrooks, exactly.. except if all the copr repos were crashed together
<jbrooks> But if you created a container from it, that container wouldn't be
built out of rpms?
<langdon> technically, two steps when you "dnf module install httpd" it
actually enables the repo then installs the module-profile for httpd
<langdon> where, in this case, the module-profile == "dnf install httpd"
<langdon> the container would be.. thats why it isn't a great example yet
<langdon> but its a necessary output artifact and the only other, kinda non-rpm,
artifact we have today
<jbrooks> OK, that's a lot clearer -- I've been missing this so far, just
thinking modules were some other sort of blob of stuff
<langdon> jbrooks, basically it is kinda like a meta-packaging format.. but,
underneath, its the same old packaging formats
<jbrooks> That's good, this is what I like about rpm-ostree
<jbrooks> It's still rpms
<langdon> right.. so .. making an ostree from modules would be just like we do
today.. except we would want you to add in the modulemd files
<langdon> with the rpms
<langdon> jbrooks, good? im supposed to be cleaning my basement.. so, glad for an
excuse to stop.. but i should go back ;)
lalatenduM langdon larsks llunved LongyanG lsm5
<walters> if we move the module support into libdnf, then we'd be really close
to rpm-ostree understanding it on the client side as well
<jbrooks> langdon, heh, yeah thanks
<langdon> walters, that is the goal .. but we think the libdnf version has higher
effort with churn.. so we wanted to do the experimentation in python then move to c when
it was closer to done
<walters> yeah understood
<drakonis> the branching introduced by modularity doesn't extend to all packages
<langdon> drakonis, not deployed yet.. this week, i think?
<langdon> wating on the mass rebuild
<langdon> *waiting even
<langdon> jbrooks, drakonis feel free to bring your qs over to #fedora-modularity
any time and/or we have a WG meeting or office hours every tuesday at 10am eastern
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email