Re: Heads up: persistent journal has been enabled in systemd
Le mercredi, 5 février 2020, 21.44:43 h CET Dmitry Smirnov a écrit :
> On Wednesday, 5 February 2020 11:01:08 AM AEDT Scott Kitterman wrote:
> > We just had a GR where the project voted it was just fine to systemd all
> > the things, so this sort of thing is to be expected.
>
> Are you suggesting that voters fully understood the implications?
Let me suggest (out of reading what they wrote in other parts of the thread),
that I read Scott's message as a mix of despair and sarcasm.
> Is this OK now to replace everything with systemd counterparts?
>
> I certainly voted with considerations for _init_ system.
The vote was named "init systems and systemd".
> If I recall correctly, no GR option suggested to "use as much systemd
> components as possible" or I think the outcome of GR could have been
> different...
This was option "Choice 1: F: Focus on systemd".
The option that won, "Choice 2: B: Systemd but we support exploring
alternatives" [0] said:
> Packages may use any systemd facility at the package maintainer's
> discretion, provided that this is consistent with other Policy requirements
> and the normal expectation that packages shouldn't depend on experimental or
> unsupported (in Debian) features of other packages.
Of course, it's ironic to read that under this project's opinion; "src:systemd
may use any systemd facility at systemd maintainer's discretion".
But, irony aside, we _did_ decide that we were to allow systemd facilities'
usage, and moving ahead with journal's persistent storage seems to me very
much inline with the project's latest GR-backed opinion.
I'm not saying the project decided "journald should replace rsyslog" though.
I'm saying that activating the persistent storage in journald feels very much
inline with the project's expressed opinion. Also, it is orthogonal to whether
we should be demoting rsyslog, or to what would happen to it upon upgrade.
OdyX
[0] https://www.debian.org/vote/2019/vote_002#textb
Reply to: