systemd: bugreports for missing service-files

Toshio Kuratomi a.badger at
Tue Jun 21 14:56:00 UTC 2011

On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 03:27:16PM +0200, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote:
> On 06/21/2011 12:45 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
> >
> >
> > Am 21.06.2011 07:23, schrieb Alexander Kurtakov:
> >> I wonder how could someone would put a deadline on volunteers?
> >> You can't :)
> >
> > oh in the thread "Packages that will be orphaned" you can?
> Yes, because if the deadline passes then the packages will be orphaned 
> without the maintainers having to do anything.
> > but for quality reasons not?
> In this particular case no because if the deadline passes then the new 
> configs will not magically write themselves.
> The problem isn't the deadline itself but the fact that you cannot coerce 
> volunteers into action and that's what you are trying to suggest.
To add something actually constructive... someone could propose that
services which don't have systemd unit files don't ship for F16 (Probably as
part of the )

That is an idea that has pros and cons.  The major pros are that it means
that users will have a more consistent experience with reconfiguring the
on/off state of their services and we'll be forcing people to add systemd
unit files rather than just letting proposed changes just sit around in

The cons are that we may lose some services for F16 because the services
aren't ported by the F16 deadline.  However, they could be brought back
after F16 is released so that's not a huge con.  We'd need to make sure that
the "essential" services are ported over, but IIRC, that's already the plan
for the alpha release.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : 

More information about the devel mailing list