Re: systemd acceptance, packaging guidelines (was Re: systemd and changes)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, 2010-08-24 at 15:23 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 10:11:58AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > > If we're still including upstart as a fallback option, I think it's
> > The intent is not to do so in the final release, AIUI. We're only
> > keeping it around during pre-release, so that if we decide we need to
> > fall back to upstart for final release, it's easy to do. As far as I
> > know, the plan is to decide later (presumably after beta) which one
> > we're going with, and dump the other.
> 
> 
> Making a big change like that _after_ beta seems like an invitation to
> trouble, but I'll give the benefit of the doubt to you as the QA guy. So in
> that case, the requirement could simply be that at the time of the beta,
> they do basically the same things, or in cases where they do different
> things, it is 1) intentional *and* 2) documented.

It's not really a big change, it's a couple of lines in a couple of spec
files, and it's fairly easy to test (do live/image composes still pull
systemd? does an upgrade from f13 replace upstart with systemd? okay,
then we're good). It has nothing like the wide scope of the actual
*code* change involved here, which we will have been testing all along.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org
http://www.happyassassin.net

-- 
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]
  Powered by Linux