Hi Neil, (CC'ing secretary@)
Le mardi, 4 novembre 2014, 23.53:43 Neil McGovern a écrit :
> The responses to a valid vote shall be signed by the vote key created
> for this vote. The public key for the vote, signed by the Project
> secretary, is appended below.
From what I can see [0], the public
On 04/11/14 at 18:45 -0800, Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Wed, 05 Nov 2014, Charles Plessy wrote:
> > Would it help to amend point 4.2.5 of our constitution, to request
> > that in addition to the "announcement on a publicly-readable
> > electronic mailing list", a copy of proposals, amendments, sponso
> - - -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> 57dd4d7c-3e92-428f-8ab7-10de5172589e
> [ 5 ] Choice 1: Packages may not (in general) require a specific init system
> [ 3 ] Choice 2: Support for other init systems is recommended, but not
> mandatory
> [ 2 ] Choice 3:
On Wed, 05 Nov 2014, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Would it help to amend point 4.2.5 of our constitution, to request
> that in addition to the "announcement on a publicly-readable
> electronic mailing list", a copy of proposals, amendments, sponsors,
> etc. must also be sent to the Secretary ? It seems
Le Tue, Nov 04, 2014 at 07:32:36PM +, Neil McGovern a écrit :
>
> This vote has currently used up about 15 hours of my time, plus the time
> to read -vote, and I really didn't want to wait up until gone midnight
> to post the CfV.
Hi Neil and everybody,
first, thank you Neil for the hard wor
Note: this is a re-issued CfV, please use the ballot below or your vote
will be rejected. Voting is now open.
Voting period starts 00:00:00 UTC on Wednesday, November 5th, 2014
Votes must be received by 23:59:59 UTC on Tuesday, November 18th, 2014
The following ballot is for voting
Ritesh Raj Sarraf:
How are other packagers taking care of it ? There are a lot of server
> daemons that need some sort of housekeeping. What I can recall
> immediate are: mysql, open-iscsi, DM multipath etc.. Last feedback
> (IIRC _not_ from the systemd maintainers) I had on it was to write a
Svante Signell:
The more important that Debian does not drop support for sysvinit
> then, until alternatives have stabilized :) (and systemd/uselessd is
> deferred to PID 2). PID 1 should be as small as possible, see a
> proposed implementation in: http://ewontfix.com/14/
That proposed impleme
On Tue, Nov 04, 2014 at 01:30:18PM -0800, Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Tue, 04 Nov 2014, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > On 04/11/14 at 17:53 +, Neil McGovern wrote:
> > > - - -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> > > 57dd4d7c-3e92-428f-8ab7-10de5172589e
> > > [ ] Ch
Gerrit Pape:
What is the reason that one can't easily run logind, or even better
> a systemd process running logind and possibly other services, under
> the runsv program from the runit init scheme, or through
> /etc/inittab?
One cannot run systemd under runit because it detects its PID and
b
On 4 November 2014 21:30, Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Tue, 04 Nov 2014, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
>> On 04/11/14 at 17:53 +, Neil McGovern wrote:
>> > - - -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>> > 57dd4d7c-3e92-428f-8ab7-10de5172589e
>> > [ ] Choice 1: Packages ma
On Tue, 04 Nov 2014, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> On 04/11/14 at 17:53 +, Neil McGovern wrote:
> > - - -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> > 57dd4d7c-3e92-428f-8ab7-10de5172589e
> > [ ] Choice 1: Packages may not (in general) require a specific init system
> >
On Tue, Nov 04, 2014 at 09:17:51PM +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> I cannot parse the last bullet point, sorry ("and any the release
> team"?). Also, the proposal does not mention the release team.
> "Reasonable changes to preserve or improve sysvinit support should be
> accepted through the jessie
On 04/11/14 at 19:27 +, Neil McGovern wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 04, 2014 at 07:54:46PM +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > Hi Neil,
> >
> > On 04/11/14 at 17:53 +, Neil McGovern wrote:
> > > - - -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> > > 57dd4d7c-3e92-428f-8ab7-10
Neil McGovern writes ("Re: Call for Votes: General Resolution: Init system
coupling"):
> Choice 2 seems to be about 4 things:
...
> This is obviously quite hard to put into one line.
It is more important not to be misleading, than it is to capture
everything in the proposal.
The summary you have
On Tue, Nov 04, 2014 at 07:11:45PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> I think this is still possible. It's a shame that this slightly odd
> pre-CFV (CFV posted before voting period opens) wasn't explicitly a
> draft, and posted only to -vote.
>
This vote has currently used up about 15 hours of my time,
On Tue, Nov 04, 2014 at 07:54:46PM +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Hi Neil,
>
> On 04/11/14 at 17:53 +, Neil McGovern wrote:
> > - - -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> > 57dd4d7c-3e92-428f-8ab7-10de5172589e
> > [ ] Choice 1: Packages may not (in general)
Lucas Nussbaum writes ("Re: Call for Votes: General Resolution: Init system
coupling"):
> Second, after asking for an accurate summary, I replied in
> <20141017202805.ga10...@xanadu.blop.info> (private mail to you+Ian, as
> was your initial query) with: "support for alternative init systems is
> d
Hi Neil,
On 04/11/14 at 17:53 +, Neil McGovern wrote:
> - - -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> 57dd4d7c-3e92-428f-8ab7-10de5172589e
> [ ] Choice 1: Packages may not (in general) require a specific init system
> [ ] Choice 2: Support alternative init sy
On Tue, Nov 04, 2014 at 05:53:36PM +, Neil McGovern wrote:
> - - -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> 57dd4d7c-3e92-428f-8ab7-10de5172589e
> [ ] Choice 1: Packages may not (in general) require a specific init system
> [ ] Choice 2: Support alternative ini
Dimitri John Ledkov wrote:
> On 4 November 2014 16:25, Gerrit Pape wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 03, 2014 at 04:37:45PM -0800, Josh Triplett wrote:
> >> Russ Allbery wrote:
> >> > Gerrit Pape writes:
> >> > > On Sat, Nov 01, 2014 at 10:41:54PM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> >> > > > Real problems? Apa
This is the first call for votes on the above GR. PLEASE NOTE: voting is
not yet open.
Voting period starts 00:00:00 UTC on Wednesday, November 5th, 2014
Votes must be received by 23:59:59 UTC on Tuesday, November 18th, 2014
The following ballot is for voting on init system couplin
On 4 November 2014 16:25, Gerrit Pape wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 03, 2014 at 04:37:45PM -0800, Josh Triplett wrote:
>> Russ Allbery wrote:
>> > Gerrit Pape writes:
>> > > On Sat, Nov 01, 2014 at 10:41:54PM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
>> > > > Real problems? Apart from a couple of more reasonable peo
Gerrit Pape writes:
> To the best of my knowledge, neither cgroups nor d-bus require pid 1.
Indeed, which is why systemd-shim works.
> Is this after all the root cause, a rather complex API implemented in
> pid 1 although it doesn't require any pid 1 capabilities?
Look at it this way: if your
On Mon, Nov 03, 2014 at 04:37:45PM -0800, Josh Triplett wrote:
> Russ Allbery wrote:
> > Gerrit Pape writes:
> > > On Sat, Nov 01, 2014 at 10:41:54PM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > > > Real problems? Apart from a couple of more reasonable people, I have
> > > > yet to see systemd criticism in
On 04/11/14 at 02:16 +, Sam Hartman wrote:
> > "Don" == Don Armstrong writes:
>
> >> Personally, I agree that having multiple active discussion/second
> >> periods on debian-vote is problematic.
>
> Don> Right; that's what we seemed to agree on as well.
>
> Don> I think
Sam Hartman writes ("Re: Maximum term for tech ctte members"):
> I'd find arguments of the form "I personally would find it confusing/bad
> to have both going on because ..." more compelling than arguments of
> the form "it would generally be confusing/bad." What I'm saying is that
> I'd be a lot
On Mon, Nov 03, 2014 at 07:00:46PM +, Sam Hartman wrote:
> This seems to have stalled and I'm disappointed to see that because I
> think this is an important issue.
To be frank, I find quite odd to call something in Debian "stalled" on
the basis that it didn't complete in 2 weeks. Especially c
On Tue, Nov 04, 2014 at 02:43:13PM +, devo...@vote.debian.org wrote:
> This message is an automated, unofficial publication of vote results.
> Official results shall follow, sent in by the vote taker, namely
> Debian Project Secretary
Whelp, that wasn't meant to happen. Apologies for th
devo...@vote.debian.org said:
>This is a multi-part message in MIME format...
>
>=_1415112161-9799-0
>Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="--=_1415112161-9799-1"
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: binary
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.503 (Entity 5.503)
>
>This is a mu
Greetings,
This message is an automated, unofficial publication of vote results.
Official results shall follow, sent in by the vote taker, namely
Debian Project Secretary
This email is just a convenience for the impatient.
I remain, gentle folks,
Your humble servant,
De
Greetings,
This message is an automated, unofficial publication of vote results.
Official results shall follow, sent in by the vote taker, namely
Debian Project Secretary
This email is just a convenience for the impatient.
I remain, gentle folks,
Your humble servant,
De
On Mon, Nov 03, 2014 at 09:52:39PM +, Sam Hartman wrote:
> > "Sune" == Sune Vuorela writes:
>
>
> Sune> I read the logs from the tech-ctte meeting, and my impression
> Sune> was that - people in tech-ctte thinks that maximum terms are a
> Sune> good idea - that they should pu
Seconded
I completely back the idea to avoid a fork when ever possible. It's
possible to maintain systemd and just let it to do the init stuff. Syslog
and other daemons can be implemented independently, as for example in a
classic Unix way. SuSE Linux Enterprise 12 has gone this way just now.
Pleas
Paul Wise writes:
> On Tue, Nov 4, 2014 at 5:25 AM, Saul Goode wrote:
>
>> I imagine I've missed other contributors, but the point is that for each of
>> the 1084 Debian Developers who are being asked to vote in this GR, there are
>> dozens, if not hundreds, of contributors who are deserving not
35 matches
Mail list logo
