On 02/18/2016 11:26 AM, Daniel Mack wrote:
On 02/18/2016 12:19 PM, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
>On 02/18/2016 10:22 AM, Daniel Mack wrote:
>>I disagree. All sorts of testing is good for us, and if a PR is breaking
>>downstream Ubuntu, and we recognize that before merging, that's really
>>great.
>
>I'm all for more testing the better but due to downstream fragmentation
Fragmentation? Martin does not apply any patches downstream for his
tests, so I don't see where this fear is coming from?
Irrelevant to Martin.
I meant this as a fragmentation from a broad perspective as in the linux
ecosystem in whole which in turn reflects itself in upstreams like
Lennart is about to do in #2621.
If you acknowledge thus start making an exception you must realize you
effectively start making exceptions for *all* since there is exist no
singularity in that act.
If the patch in that report gets accepted anyone can submit a patch that
replaces wheel with another user/group and it would have to be accepted
since no argument could be made against it, otherwise you would be
acknowledging that you pick favorites and grant exceptions to only those
favorites ( in that particular case Debian/Ubuntu would be acknowledge
as an favorite which puts every other consumer of systemd to
disadvantage ).
In relevance to this thread by allowing one you are allowing *all* and
so while Martin and his integration play by the book others might not
but as you say that can be dealt with if and then when that happens.
JBG
_______________________________________________
systemd-devel mailing list
systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
