Hi,
Ian Jackson <ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> writes:
> Ian Jackson writes ("Bug#727708: multiple init systems - formal resolution
> proposal"):
>> I hereby propose the following resolution:
>>
>> 1. Support for sysvinit is mandatory in jessie.
>
> I hereby propose and accept an amendment to add a new rubric paragraph
> 0, and I also propose and do NOT accept an amendment to delete
> paragraph 2, so as to result in the following proposal:
>
> == both versions ==
>
> 0. We exercise our power to set policy, Constitution 6.1.1:
6.1.1 states "In each case the usual maintainer of the relevant software
or documentation makes decisions initially, however; see 6.3(5).".
So in this case the Policy editors should make the decision
initially. The ctte can then override them, but would require a 3:1
majority (unless the Policy editors defer the issue under 6.1.3).
> 1. Support for sysvinit is mandatory in jessie.
This is a "should" currently (Policy 9.3.2). Do you plan to change this
to a "must"?
Would git-daemon-run violate this? Note that git-daemon-run provides
sysvinit integration.
> == version "multiple" only ==
>
> 2. Debian intends to support multiple init systems, for the
> foreseeable future, and so long as their respective communities
> and code remain healthy. Nothing outside of an init system's
> implementation may require a specific init system to be pid 1.
It's unclear if reduced functionality (or in the extreme case no
functionality) would satisfy this.
Would a gnome-session-systemd package that requires systemd violate
this (if gnome-session is also available)? If yes, what is the reason
for forbidding people from trying out new things?
Ansgar
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87ha8pt3ny....@deep-thought.43-1.org
