-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
NB: I have not read other replies to this thread yet.
On 06/18/2014 04:15 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
We talked about this before, but I think now it's getting really
close to the time when we _need_ it. See
<
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1110764>... as Dennis
says, we have not yet decided how to differentiate the different
Fedora products.
I suggest that we have fedora-release-{workstation,server,cloud}
packages. I had originally suggested these as subpackages of
fedora-release, but I think that it might actually be better to
have them be separate packages, so they can be maintained and
released individually.
These packages could have dependencies on other packages which are
essential to that product's identity (like ye olde dreaded
"redhat-lsb", I suppose), and could either contain systemd presets
appropriate for that product -- or perhaps better, could depend on
another (for example) fedora-presets-server package.
Aslo, each workgroup should be able to set what services are
started in those presets rather than needing a FESCo exception
(because that's part of the point of the different WGs, after
all).
We probably want to get FESCo's blanket approval on this, but I agree.
Right now, all of the packages are drawing from the same repos, but
this would also provide an avenue for doing that differently in the
future if we so choose.
I'd like to reiterate that splitting repos (other than the install
trees) is a non-goal from my perspective. If we ever get to that
point, we have essentially forked Fedora into separate distributions.
I don't want to see that happen.
I also suggest that /etc/os-release be switched using the
alternatives system
(
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Alternatives), with the
variant in either the VERSION field (VERSION="21 (Cloud)") or a
new os-release field which we would propose -- probably VARIANT.
We shouldn't change the VERSION field. I believe ABRT uses that when
filing bugs. Adding a VARIANT field sounds like the best approach to me.
I suppose /etc/issue and /etc/issue.net would also be candidates
for alternatives.
Comments? Missing pieces? Better ways to do it? Volunteers to
implement?
Once we agree on the content, I volunteer to implement it for Fedora
Server.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird -
http://www.enigmail.net/
iEYEARECAAYFAlOiz/kACgkQeiVVYja6o6OHNwCcDDKbLLVHzslE7pQRTxwDE5nl
JigAnAuWC//70E6F0wH8Rc83uPXX5gjy
=sKs0
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----