Bug#727708: systemd jessie -> jessie+1 upgrade problems
Sam Hartman <hartmans@debian.org> writes:
> I'm confused, when I hear you say that this risk is unique to the
> systemd option and not shared by other options. I would understand that
> statement if we thought we could avoid systemd entirely. It sounds like
> we may be able to avoid systemd as pid 1 but systemd is very likely to
> play an important role in the Debian desktop storpy even if we adopt
> another pid 1.
> It seems like if systemd starts depending on a new kernel feature then
> it might well need that feature even when not running as pid 1.
> So, when evaluating the opportunity costs of this risk in the pid 1
> debate it seems like there are two important mitigating circumstances:
> * The extent to which upstream will provide stability, reducing the risk
> * The extent to which we cannot avoid the risk even if we choose another
> pid 1, reducing the portion of the cost of this risk properly in-scope
> for this bug.
> I understand some systems may not need systemd if we choose one of the
> other options. However saying "if you installed Gnome you cannot
> upgrade," seems like a fairly unfortunate statement.
> At some level, we also need to be community players. Since upgrade
> stability is important to us, we should advocate for it in open-source
> projects that we depend on. On the flip side, if enough of the rest of
> the community after having carefully considered our arguments decides
> that our desire for stability is too expensive, perhaps we need to
> reconsider our position. I hope we don't need to do that, but sometimes
> when enough of the rest of the world disagrees with you, you need to
> move on.
+1 to all of this.
Sam expresses here roughly what I've been trying to express, but much
better than I have managed to express it.
--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Reply to: