On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 12:19:19PM -0400, Scott Seago wrote:
On 04/04/2013 11:34 AM, Matt Wagner wrote:
>On 4/4/13 10:22 AM, Mo Morsi wrote:
>>Is there any interest in continuing to support conductor / aeolus-cli in
>>Fedora? The packages are currently broken there and from what I gather
>>the team's been more focused on development and releasing gems recently.
>>Unless there are any objections, I will retire the packages. If there is
>>demand for support in Fedora in the future, we can easily loop back
>While I'm sorry to see them go, I think it's the best course of
>action. They've been broken for a long time, and I think that
>having broken packages is considerably worse than having no
>packages. If someone were committed to maintaining them, they've
>been MIA for months.
>I vote to pull them from Fedora, but to maybe think as we go
>forward about maybe continuing to package RPMs, just not in
>Fedora. The pure-Ruby approach / dev-tools approach is great for
>developers, but I'm not sure how well it will work for people
>wanting to run Aeolus "for real."
Yeah -- not only that, the list of conductor deps that are not in
fedora has grown as well (tim, ldap_fluff, (shortly) alberich,
etc.), so getting the packages working wouldn't just be a matter of
fixing them, but also a matter of getting new dependencies into
fedora at the same time.
Also AFAIK no one has tested an aeolus-configure-based install since 2012. So even if we
had RPMs it's not likely that they'd be consumable without additional effort on
the configure front.
But yeah, the fact that we didn't have packages for the external deps really stifled
RPM package maintenance. Around that time we were shifting to the dev-tools-based
delivery/install which added to our indifference toward RPM.
Another vote for 'retire' from me. Should probably also include aeolus-configure.