On Fri, 20.02.15 11:48, Dennis Gilmore (dennis@xxxxxxxx) wrote: > > While moving it is great, it's not really that important to move it. > > > > I mean, moving it is useful in the context of stateless systems that > > can boot up with empty /etc. However, Fedora is so far away from that, > > that we have tons of other things to fix first, before the os-release > > move would start to matter. > > > > We haven't posted a feature to make Fedora stateless in this sense, > > and hence also didn't ask for /etc/os-release to be moved. There are > > some upstream things to work on before we can propose such a Fedora > > change. > > > > So, thank you very much for moving it! But this is neither a change > > that would really need coordination, nor something we pushed for from > > our side. > > communication would have avoided some of the discussion in > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1149568 and likely avoided > having the bug altogether. regardless of your reasons for making a > change or how unimportant you consider it, others follow things that are > done and follow up on them when you do not. I for one would appreciate > knowing when the allowable fields change in os-release because the > first I ever hear is when people file bugs asking for them to be added > to Fedora. I then have to chase things down to catch up. Communication is a two way street, and as an upstream I cannot be in the business of pinging every single downstream about every single change individually, in particular if I consider the change unimportant. To learn about changes upstream, please follow the upstream discussions, thank you. Lennart -- Lennart Poettering, Red Hat -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
