On 08/08/13 20:57, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 8:41 PM, Rich Freeman <ri...@gentoo.org> wrote:
Stability is about the quality of the ebuilds and the user experience
in general. It is not a statement that all Gentoo developers think
that the package is useful. Many would say that nobody should be
using MySQL/MariaDB for production work, but that has nothing to do
with its stability as a package either.
This is not entirely correct.
If from now on, a bug with systemd of new version of a package blocks
that package stabilization, it means that all developers must support
systemd. So having systemd stable is a decision that should be made by
the entire community, and have huge overhead on us all.
That's not really true with systemd when the unit files (and related)
are in a format that they can be carried also by upstream and can be
shared between distributions. They are comparable to logrotate or
bash-completion files.
You don't necessarily use distcc, ccache, clang, ... and yet you let
people compile packages you maintain using them.
You don't necessarily use uclibc, yet you allow users to compile the
packages against it and expect them to file bugs if something is broken.
You don't necessarily use selinux and yet support building against
libselinux where possible.
You don't necessarily use zsh as your shell and yet let zsh-completion
files to be installed when requested.
Yet any of the mentioned packages can be stabilized, what makes systemd
so special that it can't follow the same rules as other packages?
So apart of the politic message, there are implications of maintenance
efforts, stabilization efforts.
Just the normal efforts.
I appreciate the discussion at debian, it is not wise to support [I am
adding: at stable] more than one solution for layout.
Regards,
Alon Bar-Lev.
