systemd in F15 orphaned?

[Jon Ciesla]

>
>
> Am 20.08.2011 20:49, schrieb Michał Piotrowski:
>> 2011/8/20 Reindl Harald <h.reindl at thelounge.net>:
>>>
>>> Am 20.08.2011 19:58, schrieb Lennart Poettering:
>>>> On Sat, 20.08.11 16:25, Reindl Harald (h.reindl at thelounge.net) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> WHY do F16 and F17 get permanently updated and nobody cares
>>>>> about the beta-release called F15 GA any longer?
>>>>>
>>>>> F15 is SEVEN versions behind!
>>>> Like most packages in Fedora systemd in released distributions is only
>>>> updated when bugs need to be fixed. Feature additions are only done in
>>>> the development version of Fedora.
>>> the problem is that wat you call "as intedned", "a bug" and users call
>>> the same is
>>> mostly a different thing, so if it was decided to include systemd in a
>>> way too few
>>> state in systemd it should be mandatory that it will be optimized in
>>> the same
>>> rlease and not a year later
>> If you want a new features just build it or use F16 branch.
>>
>> Most F15 users don't want to deal with new systemd bugs in stable
>> system.
>
> jokingly?
>
> nobody wanted a text-desert at boot
> nobody wanted a "systemctl anything service" without feedback
> nobody wanted a /sbin/service-wrapper which ALWAYS says OK even on fail
> nobody wanted to fire up services with sockets after "systemctl stop
> something.service"
> nobody wanted a bott with no progress while fs-check is active
>
> if you release this crap way too soon in a production release you are
> responsible to
> fix this bad attitudes in the same fedora-release or consider BEFORE the
> GA not spit
> in the users face with making perfectly working things worser because YOU
> are
> thinking that all is better (in theory)

Ignoring the pace at which this discussion is approaching incivility, in
what way would bleeding-edge updates to systemd address any of the above?
For games, many would argue the pushing the latest and greatest to every
release is good.  I might agree in most cases.  But for something like
systemd, most admins I've worked with would like nothing to change in the
middle of a stable release unless it fixes a bug.

Of course, "I don't like this, it's different" isn't a bug, and there's a
substantial amount of backwards-compatibility built in here.  I've been
restarting services with /etc/rc.d/init.d/foodaemond restart for ages. 
It's what my fingers like.  And it still works.  "Better" and "Worse" are
not things that anyone can take action on.  Specific problems introduced
are.  If you can say, "This used to be A, and now it's B, and when it
changed, it broke C, and nothing in the documentation tells me how to make
C work with B", file a bug.  You may have to make changes to make C work
with B.  You may not.  I actually found that I did, but oddly all the
things I needed to learn made things easier.  The move from SysV
initscripts to unit files alone is wonderful.


In this case, there have been real benefits to changing A to B, and the
kinks remaining to be worked out are becoming fewer daily.  It's not
perfect, but it's a lot better than it could be.

Additionally, it's not like the move to systemd was announced on 15GA day.
 The volume of discussion, troubleshooting, flaming, and problem
resolution that went on on lists, in BZ, and email prior to that is
impressive.

</cranky_rant>

-J

>
>
>
>
>
> --
> devel mailing list
> devel at lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel


-- 
in your fear, seek only peace
in your fear, seek only love

-d. bowie