Re: Re: Systemd migration: opinion and questions

On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 6:44 AM, Duncan <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Status: resolved/fixed, with the git commit listed/linked, less than two
> weeks after filing.  =:^) Tho of course a release with the fix hasn't yet
> been made, and a fix in under two weeks there without even a comment in
> over a month on the IPv4-only bug doesn't bode so well for the latter.

I don't think systemd has any kind of stable release strategy, and I
think that is going to become a problem.  There are a lot of cases
where there are dramatic behavior changes or big feature changes, and
they're mixed in with fixes.

So, you can't use 219 because it lacks fixes to some bugs.
Systemd-220 will probably fix those, and change who-knows-what else.

They're relying on distros to backport fixes for them, essentially.
Gentoo has been doing just that, but this just means that Gentoo's
stable version of systemd is different from Debian or Arch's, and so
on.

For such a critical piece of software they really ought to start some
fixes branches with minor releases.  They don't necessarily need to
have 5-year LTS releases (though I'm sure they'd be appreciated
considering the nature of the software), but having some minor
releases for the last major version or two certainly wouldn't hurt.

-- 
Rich