On 03/05/2015 07:41 AM, Petr Pisar wrote:
On 2015-03-04, Adam Jackson <ajax@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:* #615 Strategy for services that do not have systemd native unit files (ajax, 18:03:09) * AGREED: drop sysvinit subpackages if a systemd unit file exists, in f23 (ajax, 18:17:32) * AGREED: drop sysvinit subpackages if a systemd unit file exists, in f23 (ajax, 18:18:00) * ACTION: ajax to prune sysvinit subpackages in f23 (ajax, 18:22:03)What? The topic was "services that do not have systemd native unit files" but the decision was on "subpackages if a systemd unit file exists"? In other words, the decision was about completly different set of packages?
More a consisted behavior with previous FESCo members than surprise if you ask me.
An typical outcome from a group of individuals that do not know what they are doing and are making decisions based on their own personal feeling and popularity rather then common sense, practicality and hard technical facts.
FESCo decided to deal with the incompetence of previous FESCo/FPC and drop something that never made sense from the get go ( support/ship both systemd units and legacy sysv initscripts once the legacy sysv init script had been migrated ) and never worked in practice ( unless you renamed the legacy sysv initscript from foo to bar but if you did that you broke all documentation and user expectation in the process ) and do so in the next development cycle instead of now.
So instead of actually dealing with the topic at hand they decided to undo their predecessors previous work and continue this later ( more delays )
JBG -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
