Meeting summary/minutes from today's FESCo meeting (2010-09-14)

Tomasz Torcz tomek at
Wed Sep 15 12:27:34 UTC 2010

On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 01:18:44PM +0100, M A Young wrote:
> I don't think that is enough, as the features can stay the same but the 
> code used to achieve this can potentially change completely. My impression 
> is that systemd has changed a great deal during the alpha phase even 
> though I imagine the features it aims to provide have stayed the same.
> >> I agree. I was worried when systemd appeared in F14 just before the alpha.
> >> Really we should have been much closer to where we are now at the start of
> >> the alpha phase, and systemd should have gone in soon after F13 was forked
> >> off.
> >
> > IIRC systemd wasn't even written back then.
> And that is precisely the problem - the code isn't really stable enough 
> yet for Fedora because it has been developed very quickly and so hasn't 
> had a chance to stablize yet.

  Really, systemd core changes during alpha were really minor.  Some renaming,
some unit fixes (which count mainly as configuration details), implementing
feedback from -devel list and bugreports.  The core of systemd wasn't
rewritten.  Bear in mind that first commits to systemd are from November 2009,
code is almost a year old.

  Personally, I'm very sad because of deferring systemd to F15.  It may
cause slipping of SysV-free Fedora to F16, full year wait from now. And
integration as session daemon in DEs even further.

Tomasz Torcz                 "God, root, what's the difference?"
xmpp: zdzichubg at         "God is more forgiving."

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 270 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : 

More information about the devel mailing list