> This isn't a Ubuntu decision - upstream of the package/functionality
goes this way, so if challenged one should challenge it there.

I disagree. This is entirely a question of how we integrate between
services. The distribution is where that integration happens, and users
expect consistency of integration from the distribution. This is the
point of packaging. Where there is a conflict, consistency here should
be across different packages in the distribution, rather than between
individual packages and their upstreams. So we should figure out what
best practice should be across our package archive first.

> I remember a few of the old incarnations of this discussion, but it
already has become a (use)case-by-case decision throughout various
packages and services.

Even more reason to seek to develop a best practice then, rather than
continue to exacerbate a problem that might already exist.

If it's decided that network-online.target should normally be provided
by default by any package that provides a service that (might be
configured/always) depend on a network service, then that's fine, the
change in Hirsute will be correct, and we can continue to change
packages when this issue is inevitably brought up again. But that should
be a deliberate choice we make, not one made on a piecemeal basis only
considering one use case at a time. Because consistency across the
distribution matters for user expectations and a good user experience.

To be clear, I'm not presupposing the answer here; I just want this
properly considered and a consistent decision made that considers the
distribution as a whole.

> For this I honestly see no risks of regressions for nfs-server.

As Christian noted, there's a difference here in changing this for the
future, and changing this in existing stable releases. There's a
relatively low downside if we don't change this in existing stable
releases. Users aren't blocked: they just need to configure their
dependencies according to their local requirements. This is relatively
easy and already explained here. The downsides in not making the change
is: Users configuring a service for the first time will have to find an
issue and discover the bug. The downside in making the change is: We're
changing behaviour for users who've already configured the service,
which might break them depending on their specific local setup.

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1918141

Title:
  nfs-server.service needs name resolution and network online

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/nfs-utils/+bug/1918141/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

Reply via email to