Bug#727708: Call for Votes on init system coupling
I hereby call for votes on my coupling proposal and the amendments
that have been put.
The options on the ballot are:
L Software may not depend on a specific init system
N No TC resolution on this question at this time
A Advice: sysvinit compatibility in jessie and multiple init support
FD Further discussion
(I have removed the proponents' names from the summary lines.)
Thanks,
Ian.
L Software may not depend on a specific init system
====================================================
Rationale
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.
Rubric
Therefore, for jessie and later releases, we exercise our power to
set technical policy (Constitution 6.1.1):
Loose coupling
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 what the Debian project would
consider a tolerable (non-RC) bug even if it were affecting all
users. So the lack of support for 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).
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:
N No TC resolution on this question at this time
=================================================
The TC chooses to not pass a resolution at the current time
about whether software may require specific init systems.
A Advice: sysvinit compatibility in jessie and multiple init support
=====================================================================
The following is technical advice offered to the project by the
Technical Committee under section 6.1.5 of the constitution. It does
not constitute an override of maintainer decisions past or future.
Software should support as many architectures as reasonably possible,
and it should normally support the default init system on all
architectures for which it is built. There are some exceptional cases
where lack of support for the default init system may be appropriate,
such as alternative init system implementations, special-use packages
such as managers for non-default init systems, and cooperating
groups of packages intended for use with non-default init systems.
However, package maintainers should be aware that a requirement for a
non-default init system will mean the software will be unusable for
most Debian users and should normally be avoided.
Package maintainers are strongly encouraged to merge any contributions
for support of any init system, and to add that support themselves if
they're willing and capable of doing so. In particular, package
maintainers should put a high priority on merging changes to support
any init system which is the default on one of Debian's non-Linux
ports.
For the jessie release, all software that currently supports being run
under sysvinit should continue to support sysvinit unless there is no
technically feasible way to do so. Reasonable changes to preserve
or improve sysvinit support should be accepted through the jessie
release. There may be some loss of functionality under sysvinit if
that loss is considered acceptable by the package maintainer and
the package is still basically functional, but Debian's standard
requirement to support smooth upgrades from wheezy to jessie still
applies, even when the system is booted with sysvinit.
The Technical Committee offers no advice at this time on sysvinit
support beyond the jessie release. There are too many variables at
this point to know what the correct course of action will be.
--
Reply to: