[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bug#727708: call for votes on default Linux init system for jessie

On Sat, Feb 08, 2014 at 02:18:39PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> 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.

Without an official vote we can *not* say this.

> But I do not think this is the most
> important aspect of the problem that needs to be decided. 

Perhaps not, but it was the problem that was escelated to the TC

> 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.

Why not let it to the maintainers to work through such issues, and
resolve it in the TC when and if that process breaks down, like every
other issue.

> 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.

The more nuanced question was not asked of the TC

> 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.

At this point, it's blocking folks inside Debian, who are stakeholders.
It's not just the trolls of reddit and the internet, it's DDs who are
annoyed there's no decision and integration work isn't started. We're
less than a year from freeze.



 .''`.  Paul Tagliamonte <paultag@debian.org>  |   Proud Debian Developer
: :'  : 4096R / 8F04 9AD8 2C92 066C 7352  D28A 7B58 5B30 807C 2A87
`. `'`  http://people.debian.org/~paultag
 `-     http://people.debian.org/~paultag/conduct-statement.txt

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: