By emailing each of the above email mailing lists, it's not hard to
guess who you are.
It is sad.
It is in your interests (for sanity, to stop your tsunami of loss of
respect, etc) to simply stop.
Take a holiday.
Come back in a time (weeks, months) that provides for you to return to
communicati
This is called projection.
The poster evidently has a very hard case of it.
"The world is so mean. I didn't get what I want. So I'm going to keep
crying publicly and say a bunch of untrue and severe exaggeratons."
Oh well, hopefully time will heal...
Zenaan
On 3/4/14, Arnold Bird wrote:
> Ca
Ian Jackson writes:
> What my TC text, as adopted in Matthew's proposal, does is to answer
> the question: what happens if the work is not done ?
When you assume the work is not done then there will be packages
which do not support all init systems and depend (directly or
indirectly) on certain of
Ansgar,
Either you are trolling or genuinely misunderstanding. Whichever it
is, I hope this sorts it out for you.
On 03/03/2014, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
> Ian Jackson writes:
>> For me the answer is: We should preserve diversity and freedom of
>> choice, at the cost of functionality. Making t
Once again, you rant multiple lists whilst hiding who you are.
I am Zenaan Harkness. I have some (not all) strongly held views.
As an aside, I shall use systemd and have tried a few times now, but
have a technical issue or two with my setup when using systemd, which
I need to find time to solve f
Can't do it all myself.
Debian was created by 1000s of people.
The systemd people take over.
They then say all anti-systemd debate is trlling
or spm, and that anyone that doesn't
like systemd has to go make their own
linux distribution by themselves,
no matter the fact that they, the systemd
peo
So because systemd people won, now after 13 years I have to leave
and find another distro.
This is BS.
The systemd people do this is every single distro they take over.
It is their way or the highway.
I absolutely hate you systemd people.
--- jstuc...@attglobal.net wrote:
From: Jerry Stuckle
In the end all law is interpreted, believe me.
Let us all go with this GR.
Nikolaus, you do good work on OpenRC. A sane,
traditional style init (doesn't try to take over
the system, isn't infinite lines of root running
code long), as it stands now that may all be
for nothing. Systemd has every maj
I myself do not like systemd either.
Why don't I go use some other distro
since a vote was won on some corner
mailing list by a grand total of
4 people infavor and 4 people against
about one week ago??
Well:
Debian is the universal operating system.
I shouldn't have to.
Everyone, here it is a
Sune Vuorela writes:
> On 2014-02-28, Matthew Vernon wrote:
>> 2. Loose coupling of init systems
>>
>> In general, software may not require a specific init system to be
>> pid 1. The exceptions to this are as follows:
>
> Hi
>
> I'm not fully sure about the implications if we vote this in.
>
Can the GR proposal please be thirded, forthed, and fifth'd please.
There is alot of feet dragging with all this debate. The
general resolution proposal is good. It has been signed by two
debian developers, it needs three more, please sign it.
On Mon, Mar 03, 2014 at 11:39:40AM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Kurt Roeckx writes ("Re: Proposal - preserve freedom of choice of init
> systems"):
> > On Sun, Mar 02, 2014 at 02:50:00PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > > That doesn't contradict the GR. If the GR passes we have two
> > > resolutions:
On Mon, Mar 03, 2014 at 10:48:16AM +0100, Gergely Nagy wrote:
> I hereby nominate myself as a candidate for the 2014 DPL election.
Ok
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://l
On Mon, Mar 03, 2014 at 08:38:06AM +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Let's try this again:
> I hereby nominate myself as a candidate for the 2014 DPL election.
Ok
Kurt
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact list
On 2 March 2014 23:59, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 02, 2014 at 01:22:46PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
>> On Sun, Mar 02, 2014 at 07:15:09PM +, Sune Vuorela wrote:
>> > Logind requires systemd.
>>
>> This is false, and therefore the rest of the question is irrelevant.
>
> I think the poin
Hi Arnold,
On Mon, Mar 03, 2014 at 07:33:21AM -0800, Arnold Bird wrote:
> What this
> discussion proves is that debian needs to be forked.The
> systemd/gnome/redhat camp constantly derideds the idea that Linux is
> about freedom and choice.(I've been around for awhile, freedom and choice
> use
What this discussion proves is that debian needs to be forked.The systemd/gnome/redhat camp constantly derideds the idea that Linux is about freedom and choice.(I've been around for awhile, freedom and choice usedto be the bylines of linux fans). They mock anyone'salternative and more traditional o
Hi Ansgar,
thanks for bringing back some fun in this discussion!
On Montag, 3. März 2014, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
> You might be interested in the discussion in #727708. There it was
> pointed out several times that these are not the only options.
haha, *lol*. Thats a very useful pointer indeed!
On Mon, Mar 03, 2014 at 12:15:37PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Russ Allbery writes ("Re: Proposal - preserve freedom of choice of init
> systems"):
> > Since, in my opinion, this question is all about how the project wants to
> > govern itself and how we want to handle assigning responsibility for
Hi Ian,
Ian Jackson writes:
> It answers this question: Suppose the work is not done. Ultimately
> then we would have to drop either (a) GNOME or (b) non-systemd init
> systems, and non-Linux kernels. What choice should we make ?
You might be interested in the discussion in #727708. There it w
Russ Allbery writes ("Re: Proposal - preserve freedom of choice of init
systems"):
> Since, in my opinion, this question is all about how the project wants to
> govern itself and how we want to handle assigning responsibility for work
I don't think this is the right way to look at it. We are a v
Tollef Fog Heen writes ("Re: Proposal - preserve freedom of choice of init
systems"):
> ]] Russ Allbery
> (Dropped DAM and personal Ccs)
(Dropped -project)
> The previous decision does say that it is replaced completely by the
> text of such a position statement and I do note that the proposed G
Nikolaus Rath writes ("Re: Proposal - preserve freedom of choice of init
systems"):
> I believe the point of contention is that Ian seems to imply that due to
> the way that the wrote the GR clause, *any* GR related to init would
> automatically nullify the TC's decision about the default init sys
Kurt Roeckx writes ("Re: Proposal - preserve freedom of choice of init
systems"):
> On Sun, Mar 02, 2014 at 02:50:00PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > That doesn't contradict the GR. If the GR passes we have two
> > resolutions:
> >
> > 11th Feb as modified by GR: sysvinit as default, loose coupl
Andreas Barth writes ("Re: Proposal - preserve freedom of choice of init
systems"):
> Iain Lane (la...@debian.org) [140302 19:28]:
> > The rest of the discussion notwithstanding, where do you think that
> > > 11th Feb as modified by GR: sysvinit as default, loose coupling
> >
Paul Tagliamonte writes ("Re: Proposal - preserve freedom of choice of init
systems"):
> Sorry, Ian. I overreated.
Apology accepted. This whole business is quite difficult for
everyone and I too haven't managed to always keep my temper :-/.
Thanks,
Ian.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vot
Hi,
Steve Langasek writes:
> Given the ambiguity about whether this GR vacates the earlier TC decision, I
> think it would be best to simply include in your GR text a statement that
>
> The Debian project reaffirms the decision of the TC to make systemd the
> default init system for jessie.
I hereby nominate myself as a candidate for the 2014 DPL election.
--
|8]
pgpPLYFFD5GpK.pgp
Description: PGP signature
28 matches
Mail list logo
