[arch-dev-public] rc.d files, unmaintained packages - and the quality of our repositories

Guillaume Alaux guillaume at alaux.net
Tue Jul 16 14:59:46 EDT 2013

On 16 July 2013 17:50, Ionut Biru <ibiru at archlinux.org> wrote:
> On 07/16/2013 02:39 PM, Gaetan Bisson wrote:
>> [2013-07-16 13:12:19 +0200] Thomas Bächler:
>>> However, now netcfg has been readded to community in the exact same
>>> state as the package that was originally removed:
>>> * It does not work properly with systemd.
>>> * There is no init system in our repositories that it works with.
>>> * It actually re-added rc.d files to our repositories, although we had a
>>> TODO list recently to explicitly remove those (and btw, they depend on
>>> files that no longer exist in our repositories, like /etc/rc.d/functions
>>> and /etc/rc.conf).
>>> I am really confused about the decision to re-add this and I am
>>> seriously considering if we should talk about stricter guidelines for
>>> adding packages and - in particular - the quality of our packages.
>> I doubt guidelines would help. It should be pretty obvious to any
>> responsible packager that re-adding a deprecated package violating
>> recent TODO lists is a bad idea. If we really need to spell this out
>> (with an exhaustive list of obvious things responsible developers should
>> not do), then we have bigger problems.
>> In this particular case, we should hear what Connor has to say and make
>> sure (one way or another) that this type of problem will not happen
>> again.
> Release the Kraken!
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2OlCnPKr4Q8
> --
> Ionuț

FYI I have just built and pushed a rc.d free version of tomcat6 so you
can cross it out of the (Kraken) list.


More information about the arch-dev-public mailing list