Heads Up: FESCo is considering to block packages providing sysvinit services without systemd unit

[Lennart Poettering]

On Wed, 09.11.11 13:49, Ian Kent (raven at themaw.net) wrote:

> On Tue, 2011-11-08 at 13:52 +0100, Tomasz Torcz wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 08, 2011 at 01:41:28PM +0100, drago01 wrote:
> > > On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 8:28 PM, Tomas Mraz <tmraz at redhat.com> wrote:
> > > > On the today's FESCo meeting we discussed the request to move forward
> > > > the conversion of the sysvinit scripts to systemd units in Fedora 17.
> > > >
> > > > The packages which ship sysvinit script but do not ship systemd unit
> > > > according to the Fedora packaging guidelines violate this rule:
> > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Systemd#Unit_Files
> > > >
> > > Such a blocking would be just wrong ... as long as the packages *work*
> > > there is no reason to do that.
> > > I am all for encouraging maintainers to port there stuff but this is a
> > > bit too much.
> > 
> >   What other form of encouragement can you suggest?
> 
> This email thread for a start.
> 
> I'm not hurrying to make changes to my package because I've had problems
> a couple of times now because of what I consider poor documentation or a
> lack of information about where to find documentation. This isn't
> specific to systemd at all.

systemd is actually one of the better documented open source projects:

http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/systemd-docs.html

and since then:

http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/socket-activation2.html
http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/on-etc-sysinit.html
http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/instances.html
http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/inetd.html

Lennart

-- 
Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc.