On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 01:23:01PM +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote: > 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. This still fails. The expectation here is that downstream consumers know an upstream change is coming. As evidenced by the various bugs mentioned in this thread, the result is "surprise, something changed". So the discovery is reactionary rather than coordinated before putting a change in rawhide. It would be a slightly different story if rawhide's systemd was gated by someone doing Fedora integration coordination, but it doesn't appear anyone is doing that. And you say you can't, though I am disappointed with that since you sort of kind of already signed up for that work by starting systemd and getting it in to Fedora in the first place. If it's not you that coordinates this work, someone who works on and/or maintains the systemd package in Fedora should be doing this. That is, and I am trying to be specific here, changes that impact other components in the distribution need to be coordinated in Fedora among the affected components. -- David Cantrell <dcantrell@xxxxxxxxxx> Manager, Installer Engineering Team Red Hat, Inc. | Westford, MA | EST5EDT -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
