On Tue, 2 Mar 2010, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> Adam Williamson (email@example.com) said:
>>> We should make a stand and drop it from Fedora until it's not made up of
>>> bonghits and failure. (haha, yeah. thanks, here all week, etc)
>> I'm not quite sure why it needs separate lsb/upstart init scripts
>> anyway. Don't most of our packages just include one initscript with both
>> bits in the headers?
> No. A package could have either a SystemV init script or an upstart job
> file. (Note that we don't recommend people push upstart job files for their
> services yet, but since when have people listened...)
Note that I've requested a lot of that stuff to go away multiple times.
I even have support from upstream (CC:ed on the message) to bring sanity
to the package. Upstream has started to tell people to ignore the fedora
package and use their own supplied rpm
Please do not drop this package from Fedora. I'd gladly help to make
it compliant to the Fedora Guidelines, as I have done before, if Enricho
does not want to do this.
devel mailing list