[arch-general] Change Arch's default crond

[Lukas Fleischer]

On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 02:32:42AM -0400, Kaiting Chen wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 11:32 AM, David C. Rankin <
> drankinatty at suddenlinkmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > On 04/06/2011 10:34 PM, Heiko Baums wrote:
> >
> >> Upstream stability makes sense. If redhat is behind cronie, then that
> >>> >  seems like the logical choice.
> >>>
> >> Why is this logical? Is it the developer what makes a software good or
> >> is it the features and the stability? If Redhat's cronie has less
> >> features than fcron then fcron is the logical choice, of course.
> >>
> >
> >  You are correct. The long term stability was just my thought. Like I said
> > earlier in my message -- It doesn't matter to me which cron we have -- as
> > long as we have one that works :)  I have no say in the matter, so I will,
> > of course, defer to whatever decision you guys reach. I just want to make
> > sure we have a cron by default :)
> 
> 
> So what's the status here? I pulled cronie into [community-testing] a couple
> of days ago and will probably merge it into [community] soon. So that's the
> one I vote.
> 
> But regardless of which one we choose in my opinion the sooner we get rid of
> dcron the better. --Kaiting.

I don't want to be pedantic, but what's the point of that? Moving
arbitrary cron daemons that no one uses to [community] is nonsense
(according to the TU guidelines, you shouldn't even have moved it
without prior discussion and consensus on aur-general at all - but as I
said before, I don't want to be pedantic here...)

Adding yet another cron daemon to our repositories makes sense as soon
as there's a clear decision to switch default daemons. Just moving low
usage stuff to [community] because you're able to do so definitely
doesn't...