Lift 'override' out of experimental

[cgwalters]

We have a lot of experimental functionality. I think the
override bits are fleshed out enough now that we can lift
the ex designation. For example, jlebon fixed SELinux
labeling in the presence of override-replace.

[dustymabe]

There are quite a few issues I opened back when livefs was first introduced that haven't been resolved:

• livefs - rolling back to pre-live applied commit seems wrong #802
• livefs - Don't allow for booting live commits from bootloader #809

and to a lesser extent some design discussion:

• livefs - Support chained operations to live commits #810
• Keep 2 basecommits around during rpm-ostree mutations #811
• add concept of subcommits #812

I'd prefer not to lift experimental from livefs without trying to close out those issues/discussions.

[dustymabe]

🤦‍♂️ - I totally read that as lift livefs out of experimental. Sorry - disgregard my earlier comment.

[jlebon]

Our overrides are all grown up. 😂
@rh-atomic-bot r+ 0cc8032

[dustymabe]

a few questions:

• can we override with a package that is in a yum repo and not a local package?
• should we leave some sort of compatibility in place for people who may have already scripted rpm-ostree ex override ?

[rh-atomic-bot]

⌛ Testing commit 0cc8032 with merge 407bfd5...

[rh-atomic-bot]

☀️ Test successful - status-atomicjenkins
Approved by: jlebon
Pushing 407bfd5 to master...

[cgwalters]

can we override with a package that is in a yum repo and not a local package?

Not implemented yet, no.

should we leave some sort of compatibility in place for people who may have already scripted rpm-ostree ex override ?

It's a valid concern. I don't think we should be maintaining the ex versions forever but I can see an argument for having both for a while. In this particular case...dunno.