Re: DRAFT: Change to Systemd Packaging Guidelines - Was Re: Services that shouldn't be started in the first place

["Gerald B. Cox" <gbcox@xxxxxx>]

Stephen opened this FPC ticket: https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/777

So, I'm stepping back from writing the draft... think it would just slow down the process, since you folks

are more clear on what you're wanting - and I'm fine with what both Stephen and Jason wrote previously.

On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 10:02 AM, Gerald B. Cox <gbcox@xxxxxx> wrote:

FESCo has decided to review this topic at their next meeting.  I will hold off submitting

another draft pending the results of that discussion.

https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/1918

On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 5:05 PM, Gerald B. Cox <gbcox@xxxxxx> wrote:

On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 3:14 PM, Jason L Tibbitts III <tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>>>>> "GBC" == Gerald B Cox <gbcox@xxxxxx> writes:

To me this doesn't make much sense in the context in which you have put
it.  The existing hardware activation section is just this paragraph:
...
I don't disagree with the idea behind what you're proposing, but the
hardware activation section is quite the wrong place to put it.

It seems to me that a far more appropriate place would be in the
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:DefaultServices document

...

Completely agree.  I'll make the changes and repost another draft via email.

Thanks for you help Jason!

_______________________________________________
packaging mailing list -- packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to packaging-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/message/2EJWUYY7T3WIKJFA5TJ7CT3OGWNR6MZT/