#114 Stream default changes & Fedora Changes
Closed: Fixed 7 days ago by asamalik. Opened a month ago by asamalik.

I propose that changing a default stream, in the context of Fedora Changes,
is treated the same way as introducing a new package versions to Fedora in the traditional model.

That means:

  • Module stream defaults should be only changed in an upcoming Fedora release
  • Changes of stream defaults should be communicated by a Fedora Change based on the change's significance and its maintainer's best judgement.
  • No default stream changes mid-release are permitted.
  • Introducing a new default stream not replacing any existing default stream or a traditional package is not considered a change. That means it can be done.

Please read the Module Defaults & Fedora Changes page for more details — including a comparison and specific scenarios of the traditional vs. modular way.


I don't see this mentioned in the proposal or the linked document -- what about adding defaults for a new piece of software in the current, stable releases? I'd say that should be fine.

And consequently, how about modularizing a non-modular package in a stable release and optionally making it default? Should that also be fine? Technically it's just a replacement.

  • Module stream defaults MUST be changed only in an upcoming Fedora release and MUST be communicated by a Fedora Change based on the change's significance and its maintainer's best judgement
  • Module stream defaults MAY be introduced in existing Fedora release and if it replaces some RPMs from existing release it MUST be compatible with existing content in release

@psabata I've edited the proposal, adding two bullet points:

  • No default stream changes mid-release are permitted.
  • Introducing a new default stream not replacing any existing default stream or a traditional package is not considered a change. That means it can be done.

Would that cover your concerns?

So I see two different proposals here regarding modularizing content in stable releases.

@ignatenkobrain proposes that a module replacing an ursine package might be introduced and it may even be marked as the default in stable as long as it's compatible. @asamalik wouldn't allow that.

Did I get that right?

@psabata that's right — even though it might be almost an invisible change for the end user, it would disappear from the buildroot (well at least for now when we don't have Ursa Major in production) — so I'd say let's not do it mid-release just now, and consider allowing it when we have Ursa Major.

Here's what we decided on last week's WG meeting (AKA asamalik's proposal):

1) Module stream defaults should be only changed in an upcoming Fedora release
2) Changes of stream defaults should be communicated by a Fedora Change based on the change's significance and its maintainer's best judgement.
3) No default stream changes mid-release are permitted.
4) Introducing a new default stream not replacing any existing default stream or a traditional package is not considered a change.

(+4, 0, -0)

Metadata Update from @nphilipp:
- Issue close_status updated to: Fixed
- Issue status updated to: Closed (was: Open)

7 days ago

Login to comment on this ticket.

Metadata