Michael Gilbert <mgilbert@debian.org> (2014-01-03): > On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 11:00 AM, Cyril Brulebois <kibi@debian.org> wrote: > > Michael Gilbert <mgilbert@debian.org> (2014-01-03): > >> It is often far more ideal when the TC chooses to not act. TC action > >> means that the project is somehow dysfunctional. > >> > >> init-select is a very simple technical solution to a very large social > >> problem. > > > > Having to pick an init system is *not* a social problem. > > All TC decisions are attempts at the resolution of social problems. > They only consider issues that involve the social disagreement between > at least two people. The fact that the disagreement is happens to be > over a technical topic does not eliminate the social aspect. Having a social aspect doesn't mean it's primarily a social problem. > > Trying to support several init systems is *not* in the best interest of > > a distribution. Having a fully functional one (and a transition from the > > former if it's different) is what we need to work on. > > Following that logic, supporting multiple packaging helpers, desktop > environments, text editors, compilers, kernels, so on and so on are > also *not* in the best interest of a distribution. Let's pick the > most functional ones, that is what we need to work on. False analogy. Anyway, not going to play on words because there are so many efforts wasted with this topic already. Again, my position on the topic: "No, this doesn't belong to the installer". Mraw, KiBi.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature