On Wed, Jan 01, 2014 at 01:54:17AM -0008, cameron wrote: > I actually added that to the statement. I did so because it has > legitimate uses, and because it is something that a number of people > have expressed interest in using. Right, I never wrote that. I've reverted these changes to the position statement. Cameron, as per the first paragraph, please do not change the page directly, but discuss any proposed changes with me first. Thanks, -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ slangasek@ubuntu.com vorlon@debian.org > On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 5:56 PM, Josselin Mouette <joss@debian.org> > wrote: > >Le dimanche 29 décembre 2013 à 22:50 -0800, Steve Langasek a écrit > >: > >> Socket-based activation has never been a feature that upstart > >>upstream has > >> promoted the use of. > >> > >I am a bit confused here. You wrote in the upstart position statement, > >almost at the top: > > “Upstart supports both bus activation and socket > >activation.” > > > >Why advertise it if it is “a red herring that will never deliver the > >promised benefits”? > > > >-- > >.''`. Josselin Mouette > >: :' : > >`. `' > > `- > > > > > >-- > >To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-REQUEST@lists.debian.org > >with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact > >listmaster@lists.debian.org > >Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1388541387.6302.16.camel@tomoe > > > >
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature