Hi, On Wed, 2009-10-21 at 14:13 +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 01:57:14PM +0100, Steven Whitehouse wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On Wed, 2009-10-21 at 14:40 +0200, Milos Jakubicek wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > On 10/21/2009 11:11 AM, Steven Whitehouse wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > Jim Parsons left Red Hat a little while back and the only contact > > > > details I have is his Red Hat email address, which is of course no > > > > longer valid. I've opened a bugzilla #530027 as per the unresponsive > > > > maintainer procedure, but I was hoping to be able to skip the section > > > > regarding sending of messages since there seems little point sending to > > > > an email address which I know (and which other Red Hat employees can > > > > easily verify) will not be answered. > > > > > > +1 from here...I already e-mailed Jim Parson a long long time (for sure > > > more than a year) ago because of some trivial outstanding bugs in that > > > package (missing requires, incorrect pam configuration, ...), some of > > > them I fixed then, some are still left. I tried several times and didn't > > > get any response. > > > > > I've actually found a few more since I wrote that list in the bz too. > > > > > > > > > > I would like to either fix (or preferably just remove) this package as > > > > it creates configs for GFS2 which are incorrect and is thus causing > > > > confusion to all who attempt to use it. > > > > > > Hm...I would appreciate keeping the package (...and could fix the very > > > trivial of the remaining bugreports), how complicated would it be to fix > > > the GFS2 configs? On the other hand, I've heard from somebody of the RH > > > cluster team that the package is deprecated at all, how's that? > > > > Well if someone wants to maintain it, then I suppose there is no issue. > > My understanding is that Conga is the preferred method for graphical > > configuration of clusters. Personally I use vi for cluster > > configuration :-) > > I don't think its really viable to suggest that Conga is a replacement > for system-config-cluster. One is a simple desktop UI for editing > cluster config files. The other is a large web based management > infrastructure. Certainly alot of people may want to use Conga, but > I can well imagine people using s-c-c , wouldn't want to deploy a > webapp just to get a tool to edit cluster config files > > Daniel I'm willing to accept that argument, and indeed just the same discussion is currently going on, on one of our internal lists too. The issue is who will do the work to get s-c-c back working again? Conga is actively maintained, and s-c-c is not at the moment. Every time I've asked people about it (and about fixing bugs) I've been told that its obsolete and will not be fixed. I figured it was better to remove it than to leave it broken and thus confuse people. If by sending this request I've started a discussion which ends with a new maintainer being selected and the bugs being fixed, then thats just as good a result I think :-) So I'll certainly not send any remove requests until the current discussion has concluded, but in the mean time my request for the transfer or maintainership still stands, Steve. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
