Russ Allbery writes ("Re: [draft] Draft text on Init Systems GR"):
> I wish that a GR had the moral suasion that would get everyone to be
> excellent to each other, but I'm somewhat dubious. I'm not a huge fan of
> trying to tackle that in the same GR as the technical questions, but I
> respect why you want to do so and I would still vote this above further
> discussion.
...
> > * Ideally, packages should not Depend on or Recommend systemd, and
> > should be fully functional with all init systems. This means (for
> > example) that daemons should ship traditional init scripts, or use
> > other mechanisms to ensure that they are started without systemd.
> > It also means that desktop software should be installable, and
> > ideally fully functional, without systemd.
>
> I think using Depend and Recommend here adds more confusion than clarity
> since a lot of software doesn't Depend or Recommend systemd the package.
> Instead, the dependency is on libpam-systemd or systemd-sysv or udev, and
> there are different mechanisms in place to handle (or not handle) those.
I have changed this to delete the part about Depends etc. Now it
reads simply.
| Ideally, packages should should be fully functional with all init
| systems.
> > If policy consensus cannot be reached on such a facility, the
> > Technical Committee should decide based on the project's wishes as
> > expressed in this GR.
>
> This all sounds workable to me as a Policy editor.
Thanks.
> > * Negative general comments about software and their communities,
> > including both about systemd itself and about non-systemd init
> > systems, are strongly deprecated.
>
> This sense of deprecated is (I think) en_UK, or at least it reads oddly to
> this en_US reader. I'm mentally translating it as "discouraged," but I
> wonder if something like "are not acceptable within the Debian Project"
> might be closer to the meaning you're intending.
"discouraged" will do.
Thanks for the comments.
Ian.
--
Ian Jackson <ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> These opinions are my own.
If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is
a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.
