On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 12:24 PM John M. Harris Jr <johnmh(a)splentity.com> wrote:
> Yes, we acknowledge that with multiple versions comes the risks
of
> introducing more conflicts. We balanced that out by acknowledging that
> the container space is now mature enough that separating userspaces
> when you need to run conflicting apps on the same machine is a
> reasonable solution to that problem. You've asserted elsewhere that
> you don't like containers as a technology because it's duplication of
> content and doesn't espouse your view of the ideal distribution of
> "everything uses the same (latest) version of the library". I
> understand that, but containers are here to stay and Modules help us
> provide trustworthy content for them.
What do containers have to do with Modularity? Is this a Silverblue project
now?
I'm not sure what you're asking here. I thought it was pretty clear
from the paragraph you quoted that containers are the recommended
solution for doing "parallel-install" with modules. Also, the
relationship goes both ways; Modules provide a trusted source of
software to run in containers (as opposed to running an image that
someone uploaded to a public registry).