On Wed, 2010-09-15 at 15:41 +0200, Jan Wildeboer wrote: > On 09/15/2010 03:35 PM, Matthias Clasen wrote: > > > I think we all realize that the timing was exceedingly bad on this. > > I think we should try to distill some lessons from this for how we > > approach 'invasive' features in the future. > > If the vore was as close as it was in this case, it begs the question of > a proper cost analysis. How much extra burden is now generated in > ripping systemd out compared to fixing the known/open bugs? Bill had to do the work of doing the reversion; that's taken him a few hours. We (QA) now should do some quick testing to make sure the reversion works as intended. Everyone who can should go ahead and update to today's updates-testing, which should include the relevant updates, and check that the systemd-sysvinit package disappears, upstart becomes the default init system, and their system boots successfully. I'll test a live spin today too, to make sure that boots right and firstboot behaves. Then we'll hopefully go ahead with RC1 as we would have done with systemd. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net -- test mailing list test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
