[2018-12-17 12:56] Michael Biebl <[email protected]> > Am 04.12.18 um 00:26 schrieb Dmitry Bogatov: > > > > [2018-11-28 18:48] Dmitry Bogatov <[email protected]> > >> I am worried: freeze is coming, and nothing is happening. I am not going > >> to miss another release. > > > > Hereby I inform you, that I uploaded NMU into DELAYED/15. Feel free to > > cancel it, providing rationale why it is not "reasonable".
> For the record, given Martin's latest review I'm not ok with this NMU > and I would kindly ask you to cancel the upload until it has been > figured why it is failing. I feel uncomfortable adding a package as a > supported alternative in this state. I politely refuse. Either you (I mean all of bin:init maintainers) /actively/ take part in debugging issue you consider blocker, or you step aside and let me deal with incoming stream of bugs. I remind you, that you do not have veto right. The very fact, that `init' is meta-package, not virtual package, is technical solution, not instrument of power for bin:init maintainers. > It's clear that you are unhappy with the situation, so am I. > Maybe we should involve the CTTE and have them work out and define the > criteria and interfaces an alternative /sbin/init needs to provide and > what behaviour can be expected or not (and have an automated test suite > which tests all this). Sure. I will write draft summary of disagreement in a week or so into this bug. But until and unless CTTE overrules my decision, `runit-init' will be installable without uninstalling essential packages, either as pre-dependency of bin:init or as package, that provides `init'. _______________________________________________ Pkg-systemd-maintainers mailing list [email protected] https://alioth-lists.debian.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-systemd-maintainers
