Comment 23 for bug 1235231

irc conversation response to comment 21.

11/21/13 14:24:54 <smoser> so would you NAK a proposal to put 'plymouth-disabler' into 'plymouth' packaging ?
11/21/13 14:25:15 <smoser> i'd like to get that in quick and be done with it. and it really has nothing to do with cloud-init, but everythign to do with plymouth.
11/21/13 14:28:26 <slangasek> I think it's wrong to put it there, because it's about plymouth not being a proper fit for the cloud images, so why shouldn't it be in a package maintained by the cloud team
11/21/13 14:28:58 <slangasek> I see your point that it doesn't really fit cloud-init - maybe a separate source package that's seeded directly in the cloud images?
11/21/13 14:29:09 <smoser> its about fixing a bug in plymouth
11/21/13 14:29:15 <smoser> a dataloss bug
11/21/13 14:29:35 <smoser> i'm fine to make a separate sourc epakcage
11/21/13 14:29:38 <smoser> and seed it into cloud images
11/21/13 14:30:00 <smoser> but i think that means maintenance that isn't obvious should a plymouth upstart job be added.
11/21/13 14:30:05 <smoser> thats why i wanted it in plymouth.
11/21/13 14:30:27 <slangasek> right, but there shouldn't be any more plymouth jobs added
11/21/13 14:30:36 <slangasek> so the risk there is minmial
11/21/13 14:30:38 <slangasek> minimal too
11/21/13 14:31:46 <smoser> alright then. new source package :-(.