hi, btw, as pointed out on irc: I ment consensus, not consent. :) On Wed, Feb 08, 2023 at 10:36:02AM -0500, Marvin Renich wrote: > > I don't think there has been consent on the issue, thus I'm tagging it > > moreinfo. > > > > I'm also wondering whether to mark this bug as wontfix (until there is > > consent) or to reassign to debian-policy or simply to close it. > > I disagree. Re-reading the messages to the bug report, We have > "strongly support" from Sam Hartman, and "also in favor" from Russ > Allbery and Bill Allombert. > > The only objection was from Henrique de Moraes Holschuh based on lack of > risk assessment from the mistaken impression not only based on that, but way more importantly that this would change *years* of existing practice. > What is being proposed in this bug is simply a change to the Developers > Reference to encourage package maintainers to allow dpkg installation to > succeed even if the service fails to start, unless the package > maintainer has a specific reason to do otherwise. "patches welcome", especially for something which some perceive as simple change! -- cheers, Holger ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ holger@(debian|reproducible-builds|layer-acht).org ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ OpenPGP: B8BF54137B09D35CF026FE9D 091AB856069AAA1C ⠈⠳⣄ Stop saying that we are all in the same boat. We’re all in the same storm. But we’re not all in the same boat.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature