/usrmove?

["Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"]

On 02/10/2012 01:46 PM, Aleksandar Kurtakov wrote:
> Johann,
> Aren't you provenpackager? If not this looks like the best thing to do so you push these changes yourself and considering that systemd is the initd system noone should complain as this was already approved. I bet not every packager that hasn't responded is unresponsive and have done other changes they are well aware off and postponing this upto the point when they can get familiar with your patch.

I'm not a provenpackager and have no interested in becoming a package 
maintainer all thou I would not mind have the ability to fix things here 
and there if I came across them. ( I'm not aware if there is a 
role/process in the distribution for people that want to do just this )

And this process is not that simple as in we cant blindly have 
provenpackagers to package submitted units because in some cases 
upstream code changes are needed or the units aren't fully compatible 
with previous init script behaviour due to some unforeseeable usage of 
it which only the actual maintainers are aware of hence a solution for 
that needs to be found.

I did file spec file changes along with those units to ease migration at 
request and guidance of Toshio which he himself or Tom packaged the 
units and shipped them which is why we manage to reach the set goal for 
last release cycle however Tom and Toshio only touched packaged they 
already knew they could touch in safe manner.

It's best that maintainers would just ship the submitted units ( I think 
the window is up to beta ) atleast then the packaging part was done and 
the unit(s) would be in the release and they could fix them, either from 
feedback from users or if/when they have gotten familiar with systemd.

Fixes to systemd units usually arent more then onliner changes anyway 
due to their simplicity.

If an unit becomes bloated or complex it usually only highlights the 
fact that the relevant daemon lacks the ability to parse config file.

JBG