On Sat, Feb 08, 2014 at 12:49:37PM -0700, Bdale Garbee wrote: > So... I want to try and simplify this again using essentially the same > ballot I put forth before, but with all the concerns raised by other > committee members addressed... except for Ian's demand that we conflate > the "T vs L" question in the same vote. I understand this means Ian > will most likely vote further discussion as his first choice, but I > sincerely hope the rest of you will not do that and instead vote this > ballot to a useful conclusion. I agree with Ian on this. At this point, it should be clear to everyone that, given the stated preferences of each member of the TC, the default init system for jessie will be systemd. But I do not think this is the most important aspect of the problem that needs to be decided. The question of how, or if, multiple init systems will coexist in the Debian archive for jessie is what needs to be decided in order to unblock maintainers and give them clarity for their own packages. The only thing that an "up/down" vote on init systems does is placate the crowds of onlookers who are not part of Debian's decision-making processes, at the expense of settling the more nuanced questions that need to be answered for the project. This should not be our priority. Our purpose here is to make sound technical decisions on behalf of the project, not to preserve the TC's (or Debian's) "reputation" among third parties who have no legitimate say in the outcome. I will note for the record here that a number of DDs have at this point given the TC an ultimatum in private, stating that they will start a GR if the TC does not call for votes within a specified time limit. I suspect that this ultimatum didn't have much effect on Bdale's decision to call for a vote (since he was already predisposed to having the up/down vote in question). Likewise, such an ultimatum doesn't change my view about what ballot should be voted and when. And every DD has a constitutional right to start a GR on this question, at any point. But it's highly inappropriate to attempt to pressure the TC into making a quick decision using the *threat* of a GR. TC decisions take time precisely because they deal with nuanced issues that don't get handled any other way. Rushing to a vote only delays efforts to reach a consensus in the project, and is counter to the long-term health of Debian. > - - - start ballot - - - > We exercise our power to decide in cases of overlapping jurisdiction > (6.1.2) by asserting that the default init system for Linux > architectures in jessie should be > D systemd > U upstart > O openrc > V sysvinit (no change) > F requires further discussion > Should the project pass a General Resolution before the release of > "jessie" asserting a "position statement about issues of the day" on > init systems, that position replaces the outcome of this vote and is > adopted by the Technical Committee as its own decision. > > - - - end ballot - - - I vote F U D O V I will also point out that splitting this issue into separate ballots in no way prevents tactical voting, particularly given the small pool of voters and the resulting likelihood of voting blocks. If I were less committed to the integrity of this process, I might have used burying to vote a ballot like: U F O V D But seeing as I do value the integrity of the process, I will instead confine myself to observing that I think it's very rude to call a vote while other members of the committee have made it clear they are still engaged in discussion to identify ballot options that the whole committee can support. -- 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
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature