On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 12:07:25PM -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
sorry for the late reply, I'm away on a workshop...
So, this change went to fesco last week, but there were some
questions/issues around it. Could change owners respond to:
1) sgallagh wasn't sure this was a self contained change:
sgallagh wrote "I don't consider this to be a self-contained
change. If it goes into effect, we (FESCo) are basically stating that
this a recommended way for users to gather journald logs in a central
I don't know where this conclusion comes from. This change is about
adding some new software... When e.g. Ganesha is proposed as a Change,
it doesn't that it is the recommended network filesystem implementation.
I am open to adding some text making it explicit that this is a new
technology and probably only suitable for some use cases.
He also writes "particularly since it appears to have been developed
without the input of the journald creators". The code in question has
been reviewed on the systemd mailing list, and discussed
internally. Also, although I didn't have anything to do with initial
journald creation, I have been one the people handling bugs and adding
features to it over the last two years.
2) FESCo in general wondered if we advertised this as a change if
people would see it as the recommended/default way to handle remote
system logs. Is it planned to be that, or is it just a 'here's a
preview of how we hope to do this down the road'?
The latter. Not that I think
it will not work, but making it the
default/recommended thing when it's not even written yet seems
3) There were general concerns around the protocol/setup... but I
those were raised before in this thread. Is there any revisiting of the
protocol/etc planned? Or things are pretty set at this point?
This was proposed as
a Change exactly for the purpose of gathering
feedback, even of the fargoing kind like that. There's lot of merit
in the proposed protocol modifications, but it's a fairly big modification,
and I haven't had time to properly think about it.