[cc'ing the maintainers of openbsd-inetd & xinetd]
Hi,
DEP9 is implemented in the new package reconf-inetd (currently in unstable)
and is ready to be tested. I've opened wishlist bugs #660568 & #660569 for a
couple of "Depends: update-inetd" packages (the legacy tool to be replaced).
DEP0's criterion for the draft->candidate transition is:
consensus exists for /what/ should be done, and /how/ it should be done
(agreement needs to be expressed by all affected parties, not just the
drivers; silence is not agreement, but unanimity is not required, either)
I believe that there is rough consensus for the 'what' (rewrite update-inetd)
but there's not been much reaction on the 'how' that DEP9 proposes (except for
significant input from Marco d'Itri in the early stages of DEP9, and "when
will it be ready?" queries from update-inetd bug report submitters more
recently)
Unless someone screams against DEP9 within the next few weeks, I'll file
wishlist bugs for all ~50 rdepends of update-inetd.
cheers,
sez
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120219233806.GC3604@mobee
