David Steele writes: > On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 12:18 PM Ansgar <ans...@43-1.org> wrote: >> I don't think there is a way to get such changes through the policy >> process as Sean said (I tried to document what I see as current >> practice in #911165). Practically the project seems to have already >> decided that this is fine, even for packages that don't require >> systemd: >> >> +--- >> | There are 1033 non-overridden instances of lintian detecting a >> | service unit without an init.d script [7]. >> +---[ https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2019/09/msg00001.html ] > > Regardless of the practicality, I'd like clarity on the policy. > > After reading #911165, I'd say I prefer it to this proposal. But something > needs to be done about the current alternate init system support > language.
Well, the Policy Editors currently see no consensus; so to change it one would need to convince them, involve the tech-ctte or a GR. I have no intention to escalate this, but out of curiosity asked some people. From my understanding the ctte would prefer not having to deal with this (which I can understand given the default init discussion); I think this might also be true for Policy Editors. GRs are unpopular too. Ansgar
