[ci skip] Add a note that puma-plugin-systemd is redundant now #3120
Conversation
README.md
Outdated
| @@ -375,7 +375,7 @@ Community guides: | |||
|
|
|||
| * [puma-metrics](https://github.com/harmjanblok/puma-metrics) — export Puma metrics to Prometheus | |||
| * [puma-plugin-statsd](https://github.com/yob/puma-plugin-statsd) — send Puma metrics to statsd | |||
| * [puma-plugin-systemd](https://github.com/sj26/puma-plugin-systemd) — deeper integration with systemd for notify, status and watchdog | |||
| * [puma-plugin-systemd](https://github.com/sj26/puma-plugin-systemd) — deeper integration with systemd for notify, status and watchdog; now all integrated in Puma itself | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What about removing the link? Or quantify 'now' by stating from which Puma version everything is included
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I also considered removal, but no idea about what's desired.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Any of my suggestions are desired :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Removing is best for the reader, because it's no longer relevant. It doesn't give credit to the original author, whose work was a big inspiration for the native integration I did, but I wonder if that's a concern. If you go to https://puma.io/puma4/ it will still have the README from that version, mentioning the plugin so adding a version isn't that useful IHMO.
So the question comes down to credit. Do we feel this is needed, and if so how? Perhaps a code comment in lib/puma/plugin/systemd.rb?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Could also say "Unnecessary since <PUMA_VER> and remove later".
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think I would be in favor of saying "not necessary since VERSION" because people reading the README are not necessarily using the current Puma version, since they're often on Github viewing the master branch. We can remove the link in a year or two.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looking at the changelog, 5.1.0, 5.3.0 and 6.1.0 were significant releases. I've updated the message so please review if this addresses your concerns.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Wonderful! Very informative.
By now Puma has gained all systemd integrations that puma-plugin-systemd used to provide. While I didn't check, there's a good chance the plugin now conflicts with the integrated features conflict. Users should prefer native support.
Description
By now Puma has gained all systemd integrations that puma-plugin-systemd used to provide. While I didn't check, there's a good chance the plugin now conflicts with the integrated features conflict. Users should prefer native support.
Your checklist for this pull request
[ci skip]to the title of the PR.#issue" to the PR description or my commit messages.