On Mon, 2014-07-07 at 11:50 -0400, Richard Ryniker wrote:
> It must be possible to start, stop, enable and disable system
> services using the initialization framework's standard commands.
This sounds like any service that fails (will not start, will not
stop...) will block a release.
You're the second person to read it that way, so clearly I wrote it
wrong, but no, that is not the intention at all.
Should there be a distinction between "critical" services
that must work
or block release, and lesser services that may fail and not block
release? For example, journald might be deemed critical, while sheepdog
The intention is that the *mechanism* for manipulating services - that
is, at present, systemd - works to the extent specified. The criterion
assumes the notional service being manipulated is functional. In my
head, if I'd actually been writing the criterion you thought I was, I'd
have written something like "all system services in Fedora packages" or
"all system services on the release-blocking media" or something like
that - tied it to a *concrete* set of service scripts, not the entirely
abstract notion of "system services" that's in the current language.
Anyway, as I said, when two people read something wrong, I generally
figure I wrote it wrong, so - can anyone suggest wording that would make
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net