FESCo Meeting Minutes (2015-03-04)
"Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"
johannbg at gmail.com
Thu Mar 5 16:29:05 UTC 2015
On 03/05/2015 02:44 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> While I would love to see 100% migration, the benefits for leaf packages
> aren't that big. We have fairly good compatibility support, and only
> a small number of people are using each package.
Nobody can use those leaf packages unless the legacy sysv initscript has
been renamed in them which is why FESCo could just as well drop those
package this release cycle and where did you get the statistic that only
small number was using the remaining unmigrated components?
> And there's the problem of who should do the work. I don't think
> FESCo members can be responsible personally for the implementation,
> and so far nobody has stepped up.
You yourself experience first hand not so long ago how incompetence
those individuals in FPC regarding the uid/guid where FPC only needed to
follow their own approved guideline o_O
Something Ovasik would have done blindfolded, holding a beer in one hand
and typing on the keyboard with the other a while riding a unicycle
those 8 months back when this request originally crossed his path but no
someone singular or plural decided in his, her's or theirs infinity
wisdom to move that process and workflow in the hands of the FPC where
something went from someone who knows his stuff and would have been done
in a jiffy to 9 months to be ( semi ) completed!
You have already addended those FESCo meeting which among other things
they did not regonize you as neither the primary maintainer of systemd
in the distribution nor lead developer from upstream! ( and this is just
what has been happening in the year 2015 )
> I'm not volunteering to dive that
> deep into the other 95 packages.
I said I would complete the work I started under certain condition on
that report ( I hate leaving things unfinished ) and as I mentioned
before to complete this will require 300 man hours then there is another
1000 manhours work in an cleaning up process ( not talking about removal
here ) so FESCo needs to decide on what they are going to do *before*
someone starts doing this and other related work and on top of that the
distribution or Red Hat needs to decide what they intent do regarding
"factory reset" ( RHEL 8 or not ) . ( From the looks of that will take
equal amount of work that replacing the init system has taken. )
> So not taking a decision without the
> power to have it implemented is better than having it taken and ignored.
> If ajax manages to kill the 17 -sysvinit subpackages, that will be a
> good first step.
Is it good the majority of FESCo decided to revert their own ( fesco at
that time ) ignant previous decision making? no since if they bothered
to take the time to inform themselves about the topic at hand in the
first place then they would not have to spend time their and others time
in undoing previous own work. ( In this case if they would have
installed those subcomponents that contain legacy sysv initscript to be
used as an replacement or alternative to the components existing units
and try to use those legacy sysv initscript in conjunction with existing
units, through updates etc they would have kicked those packages to the
curb then and there at that meeting instead of wasting cpu cycle and
infrastructure space continuing carrying them )
More information about the devel