1 |
On Mon, Aug 10, 2020 at 05:47:52PM +0200, Alexis Ballier wrote: |
2 |
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
3 |
> Hash: SHA256 |
4 |
> |
5 |
> On Sat, 8 Aug 2020 13:51:41 -0500 |
6 |
> William Hubbs <williamh@g.o> wrote: |
7 |
> |
8 |
> > All, |
9 |
> > |
10 |
> > I would like to propose that we switch the default udev provider on |
11 |
> > new systems from eudev to udev. |
12 |
> > |
13 |
> > This is not a lastrites, and it will not affect current systems since |
14 |
> > they have to migrate manually. Also, this change can be overridden at |
15 |
> > the profile level if some profile needs eudev (the last time I |
16 |
> > checked, this applies to non-glibc configurations). |
17 |
> > |
18 |
> > What do people think? |
19 |
> |
20 |
> No opinion on which to choose, I use the default one at the time I do |
21 |
> an install and have been happy with both. |
22 |
> |
23 |
> My main concern is that since the change won't be "live" until a |
24 |
> switched virtual reaches stable, eudev will still be much better tested |
25 |
> in our environment at this point, and people might uncover corner cases |
26 |
> when it's too late. Maybe a compromise could be to provide and |
27 |
> primarily advertise udev stages before making the switch ? |
28 |
|
29 |
Creating udev stages would require a separate profile which would be |
30 |
removed once we did the default switch, so I'm not sure if we want to go |
31 |
that route. Does anyone remember if we did this for the original eudev |
32 |
switch? If we did, I am open to doing it again, but I honestly don't recall. |
33 |
|
34 |
All of the providers are stable currently, so my thought is a tracker + |
35 |
newsitem with a delay before switching the default. I'm thinking about a |
36 |
30 day test window where we ask people to migrate their systems and |
37 |
if they find issues open bugs that block the tracker. |
38 |
|
39 |
Thoughts? |
40 |
|
41 |
William |