systemd-219 issues with 22 and Rawhide composes

[Dennis Gilmore]

On Fri, 20 Feb 2015 18:11:38 +0100
Lennart Poettering <mzerqung at 0pointer.de> wrote:

> On Fri, 20.02.15 11:04, Dennis Gilmore (dennis at ausil.us) wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, 20 Feb 2015 17:36:17 +0100
> > Lennart Poettering <mzerqung at 0pointer.de> wrote:
> > 
> > > On Fri, 20.02.15 16:24, Peter Robinson (pbrobinson at gmail.com)
> > > wrote:
> > > 
> > > > >> > Sorry for the inconvenience and feel free to add bugs to
> > > > >> > the tracker, which are caused by systemd changes and have
> > > > >> > to be fixed in other components.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Are you going to start notifying deve@ of upcoming changes
> > > > >> that may impact other areas of the distro too rather than
> > > > >> just land them without notification or discussion?
> > > > >
> > > > > Oh god, stop this, will you?
> > > > 
> > > > No, I mean the above in general for general changes you make
> > > > that affect the distro as a whole. You generally land them
> > > > without notification.
> > > 
> > > I "generally" do that? Can you be more precise?
> > 
> > A recent example, systemd decided that os-release needed to be moved
> > to /usr/lib/ I did not see any notification on devel@ nor was i
> > contacted directly. the first I heard of it was a third party person
> > filing a bug against fedora-release
> 
> While moving it is great, it's not really that important to move it. 
> 
> I mean, moving it is useful in the context of stateless systems that
> can boot up with empty /etc. However, Fedora is so far away from that,
> that we have tons of other things to fix first, before the os-release
> move would start to matter.
> 
> We haven't posted a feature to make Fedora stateless in this sense,
> and hence also didn't ask for /etc/os-release to be moved. There are
> some upstream things to work on before we can propose such a Fedora
> change.
> 
> So, thank you very much for moving it! But this is neither a change
> that would really need coordination, nor something we pushed for from
> our side.


communication would have avoided some of the discussion in
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1149568 and likely avoided
having the bug altogether. regardless of your reasons for making a
change or how unimportant you consider it, others follow things that are
done and follow up on them when you do not. I for one would appreciate
knowing when the allowable fields change in os-release because the
first I ever hear is when people file bugs asking for them to be added
to Fedora. I then have to chase things down to catch up. 

Dennis