Hi, On Sun, Jul 31, 2016 at 10:53 AM, Sérgio Basto <sergio@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sáb, 2016-07-30 at 22:29 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote: >> On Sun, 31 Jul 2016 04:18:18 +0100 >> Sérgio Basto <sergio@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> > >> > why we need retire sysvinit-only packages ? >> Because they have had 10+ releases to adjust and haven't. >> >> > >> > is not suppose systemd >> > support sysvinit and why don't you fixed the packages like you will >> > do >> > for nagios ? >> systemd does support sysvinit scripts, but it's a good deal less >> optimal than a native systemd unit file for lots of reasons. >> >> nagios has a systemd unit file. It was setup/enabled in 2013, but >> recent spec file changes caused it to ship the old sysvinit script >> instead. Thats just a bug. >> >> > >> > BTW I'd like keep 2 packages noip and tetrinetx. >> > Shouldn't you give some time or open bug reports before do the >> > retirement ? >> > >> > why such hurry ? >> The orig ticket ( https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/615 ) was >> opened 5 years ago. >> >> 9 months ago an announcement was made: >> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel-announce@xxxxxxxx >> doraproject.org/thread/3XJN6JZ4S7SOG2KH2UT3GYY4K7LAJGGU/ >> >> Then another 6 months ago: >> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel-announce%40lists. >> fedoraproject.org/thread/ULPGRGI3OBFXWZISXRIX2S3Z35RBCMBN/ >> >> We could keep putting it off, but it's had a long long ramp. > > But is so easy do the units files why you just don't add it ? it more > work for volunteers, like me, now I will add 2 more packages just > because nobody updates the initd :/ Kevin has already given a detailed information how longer it took to retire these packages. Also see this https://fedoramagazine.org/systemd-converting-sysvinit-scripts/ > OK maybe you are right, but maybe you may think in save work to > volunteers, it is too many things, I think. Why it is too many things? If you are a packager maintainer then you need to follow the current development happening in Fedora. If something is getting replaced by something else and your package is a candidate of that change then I think its the maintainer's responsibility also to make sure his/her package works with the current development Changes. > It is to get a better Fedora that we try keep the packages. If they > still work, why not ? Even we have FTBFS you may help out or add > appdata or even have people to migrate some software for example gtk2 > -> gtk3, SDL1 -> SDL2 , qt3 -> qt4 -> qt5 etc etc, teams that knows , > what are obsolete like asound or gnome2-vfs (this one is a guess). I > think, have some people that can keep some software alive, will save > much resources. > Also I think this pre-alpha window is too small, I'd like have a bigger > pre-alpha window, many things happens at same time, I think we should > have more time between tasks and before branching. For example closing > F22, I got lost of emails to check, at same time, happens mass rebuild > of python, some soname bumps which may imply rebuilds, if not worst, > and everything before branching. This tasks shouldn't be done almost at > same time because volunteers will have many things to do at same time, > IMHO. Well, Fedora Project is a collaborative work. All teams need to work together we can't stop releng from branching or FPM to stop closing F22 bugs. Every participating team has their own work that need to be carried within particular timeframe otherwise we will blocking each other and endup with longer development cycle. Mass-rebuilds for any Change is carried mostly by releng team or Change owners. All these tasks are carried according to the that current Fedora development schedule. Regards, Parag -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
