Bug#727708: multiple init systems - formal resolution proposal

[Michael Gilbert <mgilbert@debian.org>]

On Sat, Feb 1, 2014 at 11:25 AM, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 10:13:25PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
>> And that does matter a lot, since such claims seem to be the basis
>> of all these "GNOME in jessie needs systemd" or "with multiple init
>> systems, GNOME will need a dependency on systemd" (and Josselin even
>> expects an exception from the release managers for that if the TC
>> decision would not allow such a dependency [1]).
>
> Whether or not it's possible for GNOME in jessie to be made to work without
> logind, I agree with the GNOME team that logind is a reasonable dependency
> for GNOME to have on Linux.
>
> What is not reasonable is the chain of logic that leads from "GNOME should
> use logind" to "GNOME will require systemd as the init system".

The logic is simple.  That is now clearly the direction that gnome
upstream is heading.  If the gnome maintainers don't want to diverge
too much from upstream, why force them?

> Yet when I challenge the assertion that "desktop N will require systemd,
> therefore Debian must adopt systemd as PID 1", which has been repeated
> endlessly in this discussion, I am chided for being insufficiently courteous
> to people who do not have the facts on their side.

I think it would be far more effective to redirect the debate toward
figuring out how to support a gnome island that is systemd-only
without forcibly changing the rest of Debian to accommodate their
world (i.e. deciding a new default init), and to do so without
criticizing those involved.  Criticism only fortifies your
opposition's resolve, and that is why it is now so difficult to work
toward out any compromise.

Let's stick with sysvinit for jessie, and in the meantime let the
project evolve technical solutions less tied to the gnome island.

Best wishes,
Mike