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

Bug#727708: init system coupling etc.



Colin Watson writes ("Bug#727708: init system coupling etc."):
> To start with, I therefore propose the following amendment to L.  I
> think it is no weaker except in ways that we would agree were in fact OK
> if we found ourselves needing to rule on them specifically, and this
> addresses points that people have raised here.  The first paragraph of
> the "loose coupling" section is replaced by the following:
> 
>   In general, software may not require a specific init system to be pid
>   1, although degraded operation is tolerable.  The exceptions to this
>   are as follows:
> 
>    * alternative init system implementations
>    * special-use packages such as managers for init systems
>    * cooperating groups of packages intended for use with specific init
>      systems
> 
>   provided that these are not themselves required by other software
>   whose main purpose is not the operation of a specific init system.
> 
>   Maintainers are encouraged to accept technically sound patches
>   to enable improved interoperation with various init systems.
> 
> (It took me three goes to draft this in a way I was happy with, so
> perhaps more wordsmithing is needed.)

In the spirit of my response to Noah Meyerhans:

    In general, software may not require a specific init system to be
    pid 1.  The exceptions to this are as follows:
      * alternative init system implementations
      * special-use packages such as managers for init systems
      * cooperating groups of packages intended for use with specific init
	systems
   provided that these are not themselves required by other software
   whose main purpose is not the operation of a specific init system.

   Degraded operation with some init systems is tolerable, so long as
   the degradation is no worse than a tolerable bug.  So the lack of
   a particular init system does not excuse a bug nor reduce its
   severity; but conversely, nor is a bug more serious simply because
   it is an incompatibility of some software with some init
   system(s).

Is this a clearer line to draw ?

Ian.


Reply to: