Re: systemd-fsck?
Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez <clopez@igalia.com> writes:
> On 10/05/14 00:50, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> we should also prepare for that situation and ensure that any switch of
>> an init system via package installation results in a critical debconf
>> warning so that no one is caught by surprise.
>> This has the advantage of future-proofing against any later change of
>> init system, letting us reuse the mechanisms that we put in place for
>> this one.
> Can we make this policy?
We need to work on Policy for the entire systemd transition, rather badly.
Help is definitely desirable there. I had planned on starting that months
ago, but my regular job has been a disaster over the past months (four
major reorganizations in eight months, complete with surprise layoffs),
and therefore haven't been able to put any time into it. There is
considerable draft material available as part of the tech-ctte discussion
that would make a good starting point.
The Policy framework is probably the right place to have the discussion
about how to handle the transition. I actually will be moderately
surprised if it proves that controversial. It wasn't elsewhere in this
thread; we were moving pretty fast towards a reasonable consensus on how
to handle it.
> One of the maintainers of systemd says that otherwise he don't thinks
> this behavior is unsuitable for release: https://bugs.debian.org/747535#46
This, however, *is* the wrong way to have this discussion. Arguing over
whether this is an RC bug just comes across as attempting to coerce other
people into doing the work you care about, which makes the whole thing
needlessly confrontational. Instead, propose solutions and patches.
There's no need to ever have an argument about how important it is to
finish the work if we instead use that energy to simply *do* the work.
--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Reply to: