On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 09:33:50PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote: > > This, however, is just packaging guidelines. From readng the thread, > > there are many things that I think people would like covered with > > systemd before they would feel comfortable with it. So, I'm going to > > attempt to quantify what would need to be tested and verified. This > > document focuses on backwards compatibility. THIS IS GOING TO BE VERY > > VERBOSE. Comments, changes, etc. welcome. > While I think this is a good idea I am concernced a bit that this makes > me responsible for stuff I am not willing to take responsibility > of. i.e. if something from this list is broken, but it isn't systemd's > fault then this should not be a reason to drop systemd from F14. Also, > some of this I am not really able or willing to test (iscsi...), so I > don't want to be responsible to fix this. This isn't personal. It's a list of requirements that indicate where we need to be in order to ship systemd as the default in Fedora 14. It doesn't matter whose "fault" it is -- if it doesn't work, we can't ship it broken. If it's possible to fix some now-exposed underlying issue by backing out of systemd, and release engineering / FESCO deterimines that that's the best fix, it doesn't mean systemd is a failure. It means that Fedora wasn't ready for it yet. Obviously if the item in question fails both with systemd and upstart, it's a different sort of blocker. -- Matthew Miller <mattdm@xxxxxxxxxx> Senior Systems Architect -- Instructional & Research Computing Services Harvard School of Engineering & Applied Sciences -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
