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

Bug#727708: init system coupling etc.

I see that the resolutions I proposed on Sunday have been voted down
(or are likely to be voted down).  Without the wider scope of the GR
separately rider (which looks unlikely to pass), my T-vs-L individual
resolution is actively harmful because it's not GR-overrideable in
itself so:

FORMAL ACTION: I hereby change my vote on "Init system coupling call
for votes" to FD.

I still want to vote on L.  If we're not having a separate wide scope
GR override, we need to add the GR rider to all relevant resolutions.

FORMAL ACTION: I therefore hereby formally propose the following
resolution ("init system coupling v2"), but do not yet call for votes.


   The default init system decision is limited to selecting a default
   initsystem for jessie.  We expect that Debian will continue to
   support multiple init systems for the foreseeable future; we
   continue to welcome contributions of support for all init systems.


   Therefore, for jessie and later releases, we exercise our power to
   set technical policy (Constitution 6.1.1):

[loose coupling]

   Software outside of an init system's implementation may not require
   a specific init system to be pid 1, although degraded operation is

   Maintainers are encouraged to accept technically sound patches
   to enable improved interoperation with various init systems.

[GR rider]

   If the project passes (before the release of jessie) by a General
   Resolution, a "position statement about issues of the day", on the
   subject of init systems, the views expressed in that position
   statement entirely replace the substance of this TC resolution; the
   TC hereby adopts any such position statement as its own decision.

   Such a position statement could, for example, use these words:

      The Project requests (as a position statement under s4.1.5 of the
      Constitution) that the TC reconsider, and requests that the TC
      would instead decide as follows:

I intend to call for votes on this (with whatever amendments anyone
chooses to propose) at 14:30 UTC on Friday (around 48h from now).  IMO
there has been plenty of time to try to develop a better wording.

If no-one from the T side has proposed an amendment along the lines of
T, then I will put the exact wording of the T as currently found in
git on the ballot too.

As might be expected, I am contemplating proposing and/or sponsoring a
GR.  Now that the default resolution has passed, a simple majority GR
has the power to decide init system questions using the TC's powers.

At the moment I think I will definitely do this if:

 * The vote on the proposal above results in FD.  (I think it is
   important to make a decision on this quickly before "facts on the
   ground" are established to make this more difficult; the passage of
   the default resolution makes that urgent.)

 * Anyone in the TC Calls for Votes on a proposal I consider related
   to the coupling question without giving me an opportunity to
   propose an alternative text as an amendment.  In this case I would
   propose a GR immediately.

 * Anyone in the TC Calls for Votes on any proposal related to init
   systems, without giving me an opportunity to propose an alternative
   text as an amendment, in a manner I consider prejudicial.

If the TC's conclusion on the coupling question is IMO not
sufficiently robust I will probably canvass opinions before deciding
whether to propose a GR.


Reply to: