--===============0230083077524178664==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000bd9868059919c799"

--000000000000bd9868059919c799
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

On Saturday, December 7, 2019, Adam Williamson <adamwill@fedoraproject.org>
wrote:

> On Fri, 2019-12-06 at 18:51 -0600, Richard Shaw wrote:
> > After reading this thread I think this is a more serious problem than
> just
> > this package. I had "assumed" modules were just normal, so I didn't
> > question them being installed.
>
> They are normal. You're not wrong. The problem is well understood at
> this point: a module was given a stream default - meaning it becomes
> the default source of packages it contains.


>
>  That module includes
> protobuf, meaning it takes over from the non-modular repo as the
> default source of protobuf.
>

This should not be possible, a module should not randomly overwrite normal
package, that basically means all the work done on the package
(maintenance, testing) is just worthless because some random module has the
same package.

We should really reconsider the whole "default module" concept - it is
inherently incompatible with the rest of the distribution. We can keep
adding hacks every time it breaks but that doesn't scale. The negatives far
outweighs the gains.

--000000000000bd9868059919c799
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<br><br>On Saturday, December 7, 2019, Adam Williamson &lt;<a href=3D"mailt=
o:adamwill@fedoraproject.org">adamwill@fedoraproject.org</a>&gt; wrote:<br>=
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">On Fri, 2019-12-06 at 18:51 -0600, Richard S=
haw wrote:<br>
&gt; After reading this thread I think this is a more serious problem than =
just<br>
&gt; this package. I had &quot;assumed&quot; modules were just normal, so I=
 didn&#39;t<br>
&gt; question them being installed.<br>
<br>
They are normal. You&#39;re not wrong. The problem is well understood at<br=
>
this point: a module was given a stream default - meaning it becomes<br>
the default source of packages it contains.</blockquote><blockquote class=
=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padd=
ing-left:1ex"><br></blockquote><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"m=
argin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><br></blockqu=
ote><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-lef=
t:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">=C2=A0That module includes<br>
protobuf, meaning it takes over from the non-modular repo as the<br>
default source of protobuf.<br>
</blockquote><div><br></div><div>This should not be possible, a module shou=
ld not randomly overwrite normal package, that basically means all the work=
 done on the package (maintenance, testing) is just worthless because some =
random module has the same package.=C2=A0</div><div><br></div><div>We shoul=
d really reconsider the whole &quot;default module&quot; concept - it is in=
herently incompatible with the rest of the distribution. We can keep adding=
 hacks every time it breaks but that doesn&#39;t scale. The negatives far o=
utweighs the gains.</div><div>=C2=A0</div>

--000000000000bd9868059919c799--

--===============0230083077524178664==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-Disposition: inline

X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18KZGV2ZWwgbWFp
bGluZyBsaXN0IC0tIGRldmVsQGxpc3RzLmZlZG9yYXByb2plY3Qub3JnClRvIHVuc3Vic2NyaWJl
IHNlbmQgYW4gZW1haWwgdG8gZGV2ZWwtbGVhdmVAbGlzdHMuZmVkb3JhcHJvamVjdC5vcmcKRmVk
b3JhIENvZGUgb2YgQ29uZHVjdDogaHR0cHM6Ly9kb2NzLmZlZG9yYXByb2plY3Qub3JnL2VuLVVT
L3Byb2plY3QvY29kZS1vZi1jb25kdWN0LwpMaXN0IEd1aWRlbGluZXM6IGh0dHBzOi8vZmVkb3Jh
cHJvamVjdC5vcmcvd2lraS9NYWlsaW5nX2xpc3RfZ3VpZGVsaW5lcwpMaXN0IEFyY2hpdmVzOiBo
dHRwczovL2xpc3RzLmZlZG9yYXByb2plY3Qub3JnL2FyY2hpdmVzL2xpc3QvZGV2ZWxAbGlzdHMu
ZmVkb3JhcHJvamVjdC5vcmcK

--===============0230083077524178664==--