On Fri, 10 May 2013 06:09:32 -0400 Rich Freeman <ri...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 3:45 AM, Ralph Sennhauser <s...@gentoo.org> > wrote: > > The other thing is those unit files really should come from upstream > > and other distributions urge their developers to work with upstream > > [1] Therefore I'd require an upstream bug for each unit that we add. > > Makes sense, though I wouldn't necessarily make it a hard requirement. > Also, upstream units may not be usable as-is. They might reference > incorrect file locations (though I'd hope not for the most part), and > in particular dependency naming will always be a challenge. Adopting a package to distribution specifics is perfectly valid. But here it's about adding functionality to a package that wasn't there before. The usual reaction in such situations is to tell users to bug upstream about it first. > > Upstream rejection of a unit should certainly not lead to Gentoo > rejection of a unit, any more than their rejection of a script for > OpenRC should. Upstreams will likely be slow to embrace the > init-scripts-aren't-just-for-distros thing. > > Rich > If an upstream bug is filed and upstream says fuck off there is still a bug report which would meet the requirement. Maybe some other distro even filed the bug already for us.
