On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 9:07 AM Till Maas <opensource(a)till.name> wrote:
On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 08:53:25AM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> Are these packages parallel-installable (and do they need to be?) It
Yes and yes, otherwise one could not synchronise between older and newer
If they needed to sync between older systems, couldn't the newer ones just
all standardize on the oldest, most-compatible one?
> to me like this would be a FAR better solution as a module. You
> branches for the major/minor releases and then ship module streams for
> one. They can be built and updated independently (rather than rebuilding
> all of them each time any of them releases an update).
Why is a module here better than parallel installable RPMs?
Package maintenance would be simpler, there would be less updates churn
compared to having all of the streams in a single SRPM, the UI for
installing the right version would be easier on the end-user...
I'd really like to hear how often in the real world that users actually
install more than one version of unison on the same system. It doesn't seem
like the sort of thing people would do very often, since maintenance would