Re: call for votes on default Linux init system for jessie
Michael Gilbert <michael.s.gilbert@gmail.com> writes:
> The issue I see is that Bdale states
> This leads me to want to let Debian's normal processes
> of competition and selection work to the greatest extent possible,
> enabling those who are interested to pursue and maintain alternative
> init systems at whatever level of functionality is necessary to meet
> their needs.
> and yet the ballot specifically excludes any option supporting that desire.
> The simple ballot I think is needed is
> 1. A change in default init system for jessie is absolutely needed in
> time for jessie
> 2. Allow the project to evolve its own solution at its own speed.
> The TC should provide further guidelines for init system coexistence
> in the meantime.
> 3. Further discussion
> But I suppose its too late for that
If anyone on the TC wants to vote for 2 over the other options or thinks
it could win, they could certainly say so. I doubt anyone in the TC
supports that option, though, in which case there's no point in voting on
it.
In other words, proposing a ballot here and calling for votes doesn't
preclude other options. We're all quite capable of saying something if we
think something has been left off of the ballot, or voting FD. It's less
formal than the GR process because of the small number of people involved.
It makes it much easier to back off and rework things.
What Bdale is proposing right now is essentially making some intermediate
decisions that let us narrow down the options for the final decision that
tries to resolve all the things that we were asked to decide.
--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Reply to: