On 16/07/13 04:39 AM, Gaetan Bisson wrote: >> 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.
Did you see my thread in arch-projects? It's probably safe to assume other TUs have more sense than me.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
