Re: [gentoo-dev] Going against co-maintainer's wishes (ref. bug 412697)

["Anthony G. Basile" <blueness@gentoo.org>]

On 05/25/2013 02:13 PM, Markos Chandras wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA512
>
> On 05/25/2013 05:14 PM, Ben de Groot wrote:
>> But if a co-maintainer pushes through a change that I oppose, then
>> working together becomes quite difficult. In this case I opted to
>> give up maintainership.
>>
> Ben,
>
> We've been working together, in the same team(s), for more than 4
> years and we never had a single problem in co-maintaining packages. I
> would never expected you to make so much noise because I committed a
> file (yes a file, *not* a patch) that changes absolutely *nothing* to
> existing users but it helps all those users who want to use systemd.
>
> I am very disappointed and confused.
>
> You should have known me better by now.
>
> - -- 
> Regards,
> Markos Chandras - Gentoo Linux Developer
> http://dev.gentoo.org/~hwoarang
>

We are moving too quickly on bug #448882 ([Tracker] packages not 
providing systemd units).  We should come to better consensus on systemd 
integration and we were getting there with the idea of INSTALL_MASK. I 
don't know that it is a working solution yet.  I have to oppose adding 
unit files unless we have a way to opt out for reasons I gave earlier, 
regarding embedded systems where one needs to conserve space 
aggressively.  And we may have found a way to do so without cluttering 
ebuilds with USE flags.

Can I ask the systemd people to design a working solution for opting 
out?  I can't support this initiative without such a solution and I 
would be happy to work with the systemd people to reach it, ie I'll test.

-- 
Anthony G. Basile, Ph.D.
Gentoo Linux Developer [Hardened]
E-Mail    : blueness@gentoo.org
GnuPG FP  : 1FED FAD9 D82C 52A5 3BAB  DC79 9384 FA6E F52D 4BBA
GnuPG ID  : F52D4BBA