On Thu, Dec 04, 2014 at 10:50:30PM -0500, Alexis Rosen wrote: > [Oops, sorry, sending again with the correct From: address] > > David, I think you're missing an important point: Quagga has a much greater > interest in being available on many platforms, than individual > platforms/distros have in making quagga available. To the extent that a > larger user base is desirable, the project should suck it up and make an > effort to keep init scripts (systemd configs, etc.) current, because the > alternative is to have older or broken versions in some/many repositories. > > Take for example netatalk - a significant project, with a large user base. > Nevertheless, for years you couldn't build a working version in ubuntu from > apt(itude) because it was out of date and broken. Now that that's no longer > the case, the version available is still dramatically out of date. This is > all because the maintainer simply didn't have the time to do a new version. > > Every little thing you do to make it harder for distros to keep quagga > current (or get it running correctly in the first place) will have an > outsized impact on how current quagga is in their repos. And the more out of > date they get, the more "try again with the current version" noise there will > be in the lists. > > Because of this I think it's in the project's interest to keep init scripts > around, and getting rid of them is a false economy.
Ah, that argument I can actually understand. Ohwell. We need to make sure they're maintained, then - if they aren't, I still think they hurt more than they help :/. Ultimately, I guess Greg is spot on in arguing that the common, generally useful parts make sense. I somewhat overshot the point I was trying to make. -David _______________________________________________ Quagga-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-dev
