EPEL (was Re: RFC: Proposal for a more agile "Fedora.next" (draft of my Flock talk))

["Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"]

On 07/22/2013 04:34 PM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 03:58:01PM +0000, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
>> On 07/22/2013 03:38 PM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
>>> Packaging Guidelines themselves are written for Fedora.  We note where
>>> EPEL/RHEL need something different where applicable.
>> Aha that's why nonsenses like the allowance for legacy sysv init file
>> to be continued to be shipped once they have been migrated
>>
> Correct (ignoring the sarcasm and taking that literally  ;-)
>
>
>> because it
>> was being beneficial to Fedora in anyway lol
> This was actually not the rationale.  The rationale was that it wasn't
> harmful to Fedora and so if individual maintainers felt that it was
> something that they wanted to ship they could.

Did the FPC even bother to test what they had approved in practices? ( 
Do they in general? )

Have you tried installing an legacy sysv initscript file and using after 
it has been replaced with a native systemd unit.

If for the remote possibility you actually did try that, did you do test 
that across updates/upgrades? .

If and when you have done doing that you can answer this question if 
that's an users experience we want our users to have and if it makes 
sense to continue to allow for legacy sysv initscript to be shipped in 
the distribution once they have been migrated et al instead of simply 
having them being dropped.

JBG