From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1OnuX1-0002NX-AV for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 24 Aug 2010 14:31:19 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 64C29E081E; Tue, 24 Aug 2010 14:31:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vms173001pub.verizon.net (vms173001pub.verizon.net [206.46.173.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D545E09FE for ; Tue, 24 Aug 2010 14:30:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gw.thefreemanclan.net ([unknown] [96.245.231.248]) by vms173001.mailsrvcs.net (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7u2-7.02 32bit (built Apr 16 2009)) with ESMTPA id <0L7N00JEYUYNNO51@vms173001.mailsrvcs.net> for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Tue, 24 Aug 2010 09:30:36 -0500 (CDT) Received: from [192.168.0.5] (rich.homedns.org [192.168.0.5]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gw.thefreemanclan.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 920B51759E63 for ; Tue, 24 Aug 2010 10:30:21 -0400 (EDT) Message-id: <4C73D77C.8090105@gentoo.org> Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2010 10:30:20 -0400 From: Richard Freeman User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.7) Gecko/20100727 Thunderbird/3.1.1 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: The future of sys-apps/openrc in Gentoo References: <201007041630.07537.polynomial-c@gentoo.org> <1282584393.4313.6.camel@TesterTop4> <4C738E95.1010501@gentoo.org> <201008241457.49173.bangert@gentoo.org> In-reply-to: <201008241457.49173.bangert@gentoo.org> Content-type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: e46e0dfe-51ec-40d6-a0cf-96a596418648 X-Archives-Hash: 3cc3af1367c30004eb521405ff1c1b3f On 08/24/2010 08:57 AM, Thilo Bangert wrote: > given how long, so far, it has taken openrc to reach stable, it is no > wonder people start lobbying for systemd today. ;-) Perhaps, but if we want to move in that direction perhaps we should consider at least getting openrc stable first. That doesn't mean making it perfect, or feature-complete. However, right now we have two different baselayouts, and if we start talking about systemd then we'll have three. Do we really want to start on seriously supporting a third one, without first getting rid of one of the other two? Alternatively we could dump openrc and move everybody back to baselayout-1, but I don't see that happening anytime soon. Looking at the tracker bug, I see all of three issues blocking openrc from going stable. One is documentation, one is getting an evms upgrade stable on a few minor archs, and one is some kind of mdadm upgrade with a few issues. It seems like we should just make the next bugday "OpenRC Cleanup Day" or something like that. Everybody can take 15 minutes to contribute to a wiki on getting started with openrc, or blog about it, or whatever. the docs team can glean the best of that and get the docs in order. The evms/mdadm/arch maintainers could make a push to finish up, and others can help them with patches. If we made a real push to get OpenRC stable I'm sure that those bugs would get taken care of quickly. Right now I'm guessing that it just isn't on anybody's radar. Or, is the situation with OpenRC less stable than is apparent in the tracker? Rich