Re: Re-Proposal - preserve freedom of choice of init systems

2014-10-23 Thread Olav Vitters
On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 08:38:36PM +0530, Ritesh Raj Sarraf wrote: > On Thursday 23 October 2014 06:08 PM, Olav Vitters wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 11:55:34AM +0200, Svante Signell wrote: > >> > The same applies to many upstream developers, they develop software > >> > mainly for themselves,

Re: Re-Proposal - preserve freedom of choice of init systems

2014-10-23 Thread Vittorio Beggi (Gmail)
Ian Jackson's proposal to preserve freedom of choice of init systems . I definitely agree with the proposal. -- Vittorio Beggi PHX di Beggi Vittorio via Cirenaica, 6 35141 Padova PD Tel/Fax: 049 8756276 Mobile: 340 4871253 mailto: vit

Re: Tentative summary of the amendments

2014-10-23 Thread Aigars Mahinovs
On 23 October 2014 22:17, Uoti Urpala wrote: > The essential part was what you cut away: > >> > So you agree that there is no fundamental problem with packaging >> > software that requires either systemd or uselessd? Does the GR still >> > require "someone"(tm) to package uselessd for Debian befor

Re: Tentative summary of the amendments

2014-10-23 Thread Uoti Urpala
On Wed, 2014-10-22 at 22:25 +0300, Aigars Mahinovs wrote: > On 22 October 2014 20:14, Uoti Urpala wrote: > > Ian Jackson wrote: > >> Jonas Smedegaard writes ("Re: Tentative summary of the amendments"): > >> > Quoting Nikolaus Rath (2014-10-22 05:09:18) > >> > > I believe Ian's intended reading is

Re: Re: Re-Proposal - preserve freedom of choice of init systems

2014-10-23 Thread Lars Wirzenius
Hi, Svante, I fear your wonderfully terse phrasing may cause some people to react more negatively to what you said than you perhaps intended. Please forgive me for the boldness of suggsting alternate phrasings below, in the hope of clarifying things for everyone. Svante Signell: > It is well know

Re: Tentative summary of the amendments

2014-10-23 Thread Miles Fidelman
Ian Jackson wrote: Hubert Chathi writes ("Re: Tentative summary of the amendments"): On Tue, 21 Oct 2014 20:09:18 -0700, Nikolaus Rath said: I believe Ian's intended reading is that a package that depends on uselessd | systemd (but does not work with sysvinit) would be allowed by his proposal.

Re: Re-Proposal - preserve freedom of choice of init systems

2014-10-23 Thread Ritesh Raj Sarraf
On Thursday 23 October 2014 06:08 PM, Olav Vitters wrote: > On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 11:55:34AM +0200, Svante Signell wrote: >> > The same applies to many upstream developers, they develop software >> > mainly for themselves, not the users, see for example the latest >> > development of Gnome. The o

Re: Tentative summary of the amendments

2014-10-23 Thread Ian Jackson
Hubert Chathi writes ("Re: Tentative summary of the amendments"): > On Tue, 21 Oct 2014 20:09:18 -0700, Nikolaus Rath said: > > I believe Ian's intended reading is that a package that depends on > > uselessd | systemd (but does not work with sysvinit) would be allowed > > by his proposal. > > I w

Re: Tentative summary of the amendments

2014-10-23 Thread Hubert Chathi
On Tue, 21 Oct 2014 20:09:18 -0700, Nikolaus Rath said: > Lucas Nussbaum writes: >> Q2: support for alternative init systems as PID 1 >> = A2.1: packages MUST >> work with one alternative init system (in [iwj]) (if you are confused >> with “one” he

Re: Re: Re-Proposal - preserve freedom of choice of init systems

2014-10-23 Thread Olav Vitters
On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 11:55:34AM +0200, Svante Signell wrote: > The same applies to many upstream developers, they develop software > mainly for themselves, not the users, see for example the latest > development of Gnome. The only way to change this is by creating a large > enough user group tak

Re: Re: Re-Proposal - preserve freedom of choice of init systems

2014-10-23 Thread Svante Signell
(unfortunately this mail will probably not result in the correct thread order. Don't know if the cause is my MUA evolution, or the web interface of the debian-vote list archives) > On 2014-10-17 09:35, Hörmetjan Yiltiz wrote: > Users still cannot vote? > No. > Hello, It is well known tha

Re: Maximum term for tech ctte members

2014-10-23 Thread Svante Signell
Hello, Please don't forget to make the number of members in the CTTE an odd number too, either by adding or removing one member. This was shortly discussed especially in: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=+636783#180 onwards and summarized in #210. Thanks! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, em

Re: Tentative summary of the amendments

2014-10-23 Thread Ian Jackson
Joey Hess writes ("Re: Tentative summary of the amendments"): > My understanding though, is that this GR would change a TC decision, > with the blessing of the TC, such that the GR becomes the new TC > decision. So the GR result should be no harder to change than any > other TC decision. Yes, abso

Re: Reducing the discussion and the voting period to 1 week

2014-10-23 Thread Lucas Nussbaum
On 23/10/14 at 07:52 +0100, Jonathan Dowland wrote: > Dear Lucas, > > On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 05:22:39PM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > > I think that the current set of options would be a sensible ballot, and > > I'm not aware of any discussions to add another option, so I'm inclined > > to short