> "Russ" == Russ Allbery writes:
Russ> I think this clearly and unambiguously says that maintainers
Russ> can depend on unit support and drop init scripts from their
Russ> packages if they so choose, and that this choice only requires
Russ> as much justification as rejecting a
❦ 28 décembre 2020 10:32 -05, Sam Hartman:
> But for example, we have a rule that is fairly basic to our community
> that we don't break upgrades, or at least we try hard not to.
This is becoming harder and harder because we pile more and more choices
(init choice, initramfs choice, merged-usr
Sam Hartman writes:
> The issue that came up in the policy discussion is that there may be
> implications for removing an init script. As an example upgrades may
> break. In the case of NetworkManager, you might find on an upgrade from
> buster to bullseye that you no longer have network becaus
> "Russ" == Russ Allbery writes:
Russ> We do drop features all the time between stable releases,
Russ> though, and generally that too is at the maintainer's
Russ> discretion. The package maintainer's normal obligation in
Russ> Debian isn't to keep everything working that prev
Hello,
On Mon 28 Dec 2020 at 12:24AM +01, gregor herrmann wrote:
> On Sun, 27 Dec 2020 15:39:47 -0700, Sean Whitton wrote:
>
>> On Sun 27 Dec 2020 at 07:26PM +02, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
>> > My reasoning is that init scripts are the end goal, and that elogind is
>> > just a symptom of that end go
5 matches
Mail list logo
