Scott Schmit <i.grok@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 09:39:32AM +0200, Miloslav TrmaÄ? wrote: >> This optimizes the migration path at the cost of making the final >> state ugly; I'm not sure that is a good bargain. > Once F20 rolls out and F17 goes EOL, maintainers can simply > s/systemd_post_enable/systemd_post/ and then things won't be so ugly (or > final). I remain of the opinion that it's not a good idea to remove all trace of the per-package enable decisions from the packages themselves. *If* we get to F20 without realizing that we'd like the packages to specify the defaults, then we can remove the redundant macro definitions. In the meantime, people who are arguing against this seem to be entirely too confident that the current design is perfect. regards, tom lane
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
