On 6. 12. 2012 at 11:08:43, Seth Vidal wrote:
On Thu, 6 Dec 2012, Jan Zelený wrote:
> Well, not exactly, you would still need to upgrade all packages that the
> new version of Libreoffice depends on and all packages these updated
> packages depend on and so on ... The only difference is that these
> updated packages would need to be a part of the collection while keeping
> the rest of the system intact. However the maintenance burden would be
> even higher, as maintainers would need to take care of multiple versions
> of packages in each Fedora.
>
> Bottom line, the final effect for user wouldn't be much different from
> current state of things (in fact it might get even more complicated by
> the non-trivial way how programs in collections are executed). Therefore
> this isn't exactly the use case SCLs try solve.
I find it interesting that we've not really named the use case that SCLs
are trying to solve for. It appears to be for the case of a developer who
wants to run against a specific version of something (normally a language
or module for that language)
The original use case for SCLs is to provide a way to deliver newer versions
of SW in stable distributions like RHEL/CentOS than those available in the
core system and make sure system packages and collection packages don't
collide in any way (names, libraries, system paths, ...).
However as sort of a side effect all other use cases emerge (more stable SW in
Fedora, multiple versions of SW, ...).
--
Thank you
Jan Zeleny
Red Hat Software Engineer
Brno, Czech Republic