On Mon, 2014-07-07 at 11:50 -0400, Richard Ryniker wrote: > > It must be possible to start, stop, enable and disable system > > services using the initialization framework's standard commands. > > This sounds like any service that fails (will not start, will not > stop...) will block a release. You're the second person to read it that way, so clearly I wrote it wrong, but no, that is not the intention at all. > Should there be a distinction between "critical" services that must work > or block release, and lesser services that may fail and not block > release? For example, journald might be deemed critical, while sheepdog > is not. The intention is that the *mechanism* for manipulating services - that is, at present, systemd - works to the extent specified. The criterion assumes the notional service being manipulated is functional. In my head, if I'd actually been writing the criterion you thought I was, I'd have written something like "all system services in Fedora packages" or "all system services on the release-blocking media" or something like that - tied it to a *concrete* set of service scripts, not the entirely abstract notion of "system services" that's in the current language. Anyway, as I said, when two people read something wrong, I generally figure I wrote it wrong, so - can anyone suggest wording that would make this clearer? -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net -- test mailing list test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
