Re: Review of proposals

> "Marco" == Marco d'Itri writes: Marco> lu...@debian.org wrote: >> In order to save voters' time by making it possible to read >> proposals in a more sensible order, I think they should be >> re-ordered as: Marco> I agree. I don't object to an ordering change. I do note

Re: Please drop/replace the use of the term "diversity"

> "Kurt" == Kurt Roeckx writes: Kurt> So I did an s/Init system diversity/multiple init Kurt> systems/. The text in B and C doesn't match exactly, since B Kurt> and C still have "Using its power under Constitution section Kurt> 4.1 (5), ". It is intentional that the text in

Re: Review of proposals

lu...@debian.org wrote: >In order to save voters' time by making it possible to read proposals in >a more sensible order, I think they should be re-ordered as: I agree. >Concern about length of proposal D >== > >I am a bit concerned about the length of proposal D,

Re: Typo in proposal D

On Thu, Nov 28, 2019 at 08:10:44PM +0200, Martin Michlmayr wrote: > "which is not the what the user wanted" > > "not the what": s/the// > > The proposal also contains Markdown syntax (**, ``) which imho should > be converted to HTML on the web site. If Ian can confirm that the intention is to re

Re: Please drop/replace the use of the term "diversity"

On Thu, Nov 28, 2019 at 09:07:19AM -0500, Sam Hartman wrote: > > I'm definitely fine with Kurt's revision to the title of Proposal A > given the similar change to proposal E and Ian's comments. > > > If I'm permitted to make the following change under A.1(6) (that is, > permitted to make the fol

Re: Please drop/replace the use of the term "diversity" [and 1 more messages]

[2019-11-27 16:19] Ian Jackson > I am not the proposer of any of the options that use the word > "diversity". I have addressed this message to (amongst others) > Dmitry, who is the proponent of the relevant Member-proposed option. > > I do not feel I can predict with confidence what Dmitry's vi

Re: Please drop/replace the use of the term "diversity" [and 1 more messages]

Ian Jackson dijo [Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 04:19:25PM +]: > Chris Lamb writes ("Please drop/replace the use of the term "diversity""): > Enrico writes: > > Something like s/init diversity/support for multiple init systems/ > > I support this proposal. Thanks, Ian (and thanks, Enrico, and thanks,

Typo in proposal B

"It is important that the project support the efforts" s/support/supports/? (I know British and American English don't agree whether an organization is singular or plural but it seems to me that "the project" is singular.) -- Martin Michlmayr https://www.cyrius.com/

Review of proposals

Hi, I've spent some time (re-)reading all proposals. Here are various comments: Ordering In order to save voters' time by making it possible to read proposals in a more sensible order, I think they should be re-ordered as: Proposal E / Choice 5: Support for multiple init systems is Req

Typo in proposal D

"which is not the what the user wanted" "not the what": s/the// The proposal also contains Markdown syntax (**, ``) which imho should be converted to HTML on the web site. -- Martin Michlmayr https://www.cyrius.com/

Mainonta mahdollisuudet / Sponsoroidun sisällön mahdollisuudet tonnikala.net

*Hyvä vastaanottaja, Teemme parhaillaan töitä erään markkinajohtaja yrityksen kanssa parantaaksemme heidän brändinsä näkyvyyttä netissä sisältötuotannon kautta. Etsiessämme mahdollisia yhteistyösivustoja, löysimme teidän sivustonne tonnikala.net Jos sisältöyhteistyö on kanssa

Re: Please drop/replace the use of the term "diversity"

I'm definitely fine with Kurt's revision to the title of Proposal A given the similar change to proposal E and Ian's comments. If I'm permitted to make the following change under A.1(6) (that is, permitted to make the following change without resetting the clock) I propose to make the following

Re: Please drop/replace the use of the term "diversity"

Micha Lenk writes ("Re: Please drop/replace the use of the term "diversity""): > I support avoiding the term diversity in the context of this GR for > the already mentioned good reasons. However, I would consider > "alternative init systems" a better phrase than "multiple init > systems" in this co

Re: Please drop/replace the use of the term "diversity"

Simon McVittie writes ("Re: Please drop/replace the use of the term "diversity""): > I agree. I have been uncomfortable with this in the context of "init > diversity" efforts, but I didn't raise it in the past because I couldn't > articulate clearly why I felt that it was a problem. Since it's no

Re: Please drop/replace the use of the term "diversity"

On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 07:15:17PM +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote: > I've updated choice 1 and 5 like that. thank you. > Note that the text of choice 1, 2 and 3 still mention it: > "our current position on Init systems, Init system diversity, and the use of > systemd facilities." how about replacing t

Re: Re: Re-Proposing: General Resolution on Init Systems and systemd

Ian Jackson wrote: - -8<- Title: Support non-systemd systems, without blocking progress PRINCIPLES 1. We wish to continue to support multiple init systems for the foreseeable future. And we want to improve our systemd support. We are disappointed that this has had to involve another GR.