Mass changes to packaging

"Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" johannbg at gmail.com
Tue Aug 21 18:09:38 UTC 2012


On 08/21/2012 05:08 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Tue, 21.08.12 16:52, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" (johannbg at gmail.com) wrote:
>
>> >On 08/21/2012 02:52 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>>> > >However, the person who is sending these bugs reports is
>>> > >(a) in a much better position to change the packages because they
>>> > >understand the problem and the solution, and (b) ought to take on this
>>> > >work because that's part of whatever feature/cleanup/etc they are
>>> > >proposing, instead of pushing part of that work off to everyone else.
>> >
>> >That's how I*initially*  though the feature process worked as in the
>> >feature owner always has to do all the work.
>> >
>> >Then again I suspect not many maintainers will do this change since
>> >if I'm not mistaken it a) means they have to have separated spec
>> >files for <F18 and b) will break everybody's upgrade path since if
>> >I'm not mistaken preset*resets*  units enable/disablement*again*  (
>> >it happens when the legacy sysv to systemd migration takes place
>> >)...
> No, presets don't reset existing enablement/disablement status.
>
> Presets only matter with the initial installation of a package and when
> a package is converted from sysv to systemd, but do not matter if a
> package already uses systemd unit files, or just converts non-macro
> scriptlets to macro scriptlets.

But it's still necessary to keep two separate spec files ( <F18 & F18> ) 
+ given the time of the packaging guideline changes and the branching 
happening the *day after* I tempted to put on my QA hat and argue this 
should only apply to F19 not F18 and from the looks of it the Red Hat's 
systemd *Team* is behind this which constitutes of what 5 - 10 people 
now so there should be sufficient manpower for those that requested this 
to actually make those changes themselves before F19 get's released...

JBG
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20120821/9362085d/attachment.html>


More information about the devel mailing list