Re: Is it the job of Lintian to push an agenda?
On Sat, Jul 13, 2019 at 02:22:01PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Matthias Klumpp <mak@debian.org> writes:
>
> > With two Debian stable releases defaulting to systemd now, I think a
> > solid case could be made to at least relax the "must" requirement to a
> > "should" in policy (but that should better go to the respective bug
> > report).
>
> The Policy process is not equipped to deal with this because that process
> requires fairly consensus, and I don't believe that's possible to reach on
> this topic.
>
> I don't know what decision-making process the project should use here: a
> big thread on debian-devel (wow, that sounds fun), a bunch of in-person
> conversations at DebConf (probably way more productive but excludes some
> folks), the TC (tried and didn't work very well), a GR, some new mediated
> consensus process, or what. Or maybe some working group that goes all-in
> on creating a "good enough" automated translation from unit files to
> sysvinit scripts and we support sysvinit that way and thereby dodge the
> problem.
The alternative seems to be a large number of package maintainers
willfuly ignoring a particular reading of the Policy, whether or not
that reading of the policy is "correct" or not. Hopefully we can
avoid bug priority escalation/descalation wars over what might or
might not be a policy violation. Oh joy....
- Ted
P.S. I'm going to be adding an override in e2fsprogs for
package-supports-alternative-init-but-no-init.d-script because it
has false positive, regardless of its claim:
N: Severity: important, Certainty: certain
It most *definitely* is not certain. We went through quite a bit of
trouble providing alternative functionality via cron, and not via
(only) systemd timers. I will admit the functionality is slightly
better if you are using systemd, but as saying goes, "patches
gratefully accepted". Whining for developers to do extra work via
Debian Policy is, well, not.
And I say all of this not being a systemd fan. But the vast majority
of Linux ecosystem has made a choice, and we should just move *on*.
Reply to: