[arch-dev-public] rc.d files, unmaintained packages - and the quality of our repositories

[Thomas Bächler]

So, I understand that some people did not want to rebuild their packages
just for the removal of the rc.d files. The "next rebuild" will come
eventually. Now, adding new packages to the repositories with rc.d files
in them is a different story:

$ pkgfile -vr ^/etc/rc.d
extra/ntp 4.2.6.p5-14   /etc/rc.d/ntpd
extra/ntp 4.2.6.p5-14   /etc/rc.d/ntpdate
extra/tomcat6 6.0.37-1  /etc/rc.d/tomcat6
extra/x11vnc 0.9.13-3   /etc/rc.d/x11vnc
community/netcfg 3.1-4  /etc/rc.d/net-auto-wireless
community/netcfg 3.1-4  /etc/rc.d/net-auto-wired
community/netcfg 3.1-4  /etc/rc.d/net-profiles
community/netcfg 3.1-4  /etc/rc.d/net-rename
community/netcfg 3.1-4  /etc/rc.d/functions.d/net-set-variable

While ntp, tomcat6 and x11vnc could have used a rebuild after being in
this state for 2 months, it's not that big a deal.

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.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 901 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-dev-public/attachments/20130716/828e81ef/attachment.asc>