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

[Gerald B. Cox]

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(a)bzb.us&gt; wrote:

>  On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 3:14 PM, Jason L Tibbitts III <tibbs(a)math.uh.edu&gt;
>  wrote:
>
> > >>>>> "GBC" == Gerald B Cox <gbcox(a)bzb.us&gt; 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!
>
>

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

[Gerald B. Cox]

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(a)bzb.us&gt; 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(a)bzb.us&gt; wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 3:14 PM, Jason L Tibbitts III <tibbs(a)math.uh.edu&gt;
> > wrote:
> >
> >> >>>>> "GBC" == Gerald B Cox <gbcox(a)bzb.us&gt;
> 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!
> >
> >
>