On 19/01/14 03:25, Ben Hutchings wrote:
>
>> In general, I've been quite unhappy with the excessive invocation of
>> the TC recently, with developers seeming to view this as a first,
>> rather than absolute last, resort.
> [...]
>
> Constitutionally, a GR is the last resort in that it can overrule
]] Daniel Pocock
> E.g. if we choose systemd, who will implement all the things that need
> to be changed outside the Gnome related packages? What will immediately
> fail if not adapted to systemd?
In general, nothing should fail. sysvinit scripts are first class
citizens in the systemd world
Guillem Jover writes ("GR: Selecting the default init system for Debian"):
> I think that forcing a decision through the TC at this time was very
> premature and inappropriate, [...]
Perhaps surprisingly, I am not entirely opposed to the idea of a GR
for this question.
My reasons are quite differ
I was going to write something longer about this, and I may still
depending on whether I feel like I have a useful way to present the
thoughts that are mingling in my head. But I wanted to at least briefly
support Ian's point about a GR possibly being a more appropriate
decision-making process if
Le Fri, Jan 03, 2014 at 02:54:51PM +0900, Charles Plessy a écrit :
> Le Thu, Dec 26, 2013 at 07:33:41PM +0100, Martin Zobel-Helas a écrit :
> >
> > assuming the content is entirely static, we could move dep.debian.net to
> > dillon.debian.org.
> >
> > Would that be an option for you?
>
> I see t
Russ Allbery writes ("Re: GR: Selecting the default init system for Debian"):
> Ian Jackson writes:
> > I do think that the proper process is for the TC to make a decision at
> > this stage. The way I read the constitution and the context is that it
> > is the TC's job. Evidently you disagree.
On Sun, 19 Jan 2014, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Le Fri, Jan 03, 2014 at 02:54:51PM +0900, Charles Plessy a écrit :
> > Le Thu, Dec 26, 2013 at 07:33:41PM +0100, Martin Zobel-Helas a écrit :
> > >
> > > assuming the content is entirely static, we could move dep.debian.net to
> > > dillon.debian.org.
On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 12:04:17PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> My reasons are quite different to yours: to summarise, it seems to me
> that the init system decision involves political questions as well as
> technical ones.
I would gladly vote an option that says: "technically, we trust what the
T
Enrico Zini writes ("Re: GR: Selecting the default init system for Debian"):
> A constructive thing that we may do as a project to address the
> political side of the matter, is to add to our technical decision a list
> of things that we wish our upstreams would do to make all our lives
> easier in
Hi Guillem,
I think you are missing the following options and have only listed options
which you consider sensible or which you loath:
h.) support them all equally: systemd, upstart, sysv and openrc and keep sysv
as the default
i.) support them all equally: systemd, upstart, sysv and openrc an
Hi Holger,
On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 04:53:12PM +0100, Holger Levsen wrote:
> o.) my brain hurts, this is difficult, let's go shopping!
> p.) further discussion
p.) is rather "I'd prefer fixing some bugs over voting"
and further discussion is q.)
> *excellent* (bad) example, why voting is or can
Здравствуйте.
Я не так давно начал пробовать использовать Гну/Линукс и Дебиан в
частности. У меня появилось желание внести посильный вклад в развитие
этих проектов. Я вольный дизайнер, мне интересны различные задачи
графического и веб-дизайна, среди которых также и задачи внешнего вида и
логик
12 matches
Mail list logo
