On Mon, 20 Nov 2017 10:01:17 +0100 John Hughes <j...@atlantech.com> wrote:
> On 19/11/17 15:10, Jaromil wrote: > > Following up after the conversation on redis, when we had the > > elected Debian leader chiming in here to defend his position and > > keep deleting init.d scripts, I still believe this is again "even > > worst than I thought" and it is "vandalism". > But Jaromil, as Chris Lamb pointed out that is not what happened: > > Chris Lamb: > > I am the maintainer of Redis in Debian. All I have done is removed > > some ill-conceived hooks that were not used by anyone. I have not > > dropped sysvinit support and nor do I have any intention to do so. > > I only ask politely that you do stop to refering to my work as > > "vandalism". > To summarise. > > 1. the upstream redis distribution does not include an init script. > (There is an example init script in their git, but nothing in the > distributed tarball). > > 2. Debian wrote their own init script. > > 3. At some point they added an undocumented feature to their init > script. This feature does not exist in the upstream example init > script. > > 4. Since the feature was buggy, and since it had never been > documented, Chris Lamb removed it. > > 5. Some people misread the commit message as saying that sysvinit > support was being dropped. They didn't check whether that was the > case by looking at the publicly available package and source. > > Is this the Devuan policy? "Assume bad faith"? > And now 'A T' cannot reply to the correct thread ;-) Rowland _______________________________________________ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
