Naming of init.d scripts and the LSB (Was: Delegation for trademark negotiatons with the DCCA)

[Petter Reinholdtsen <pere@hungry.com>]

[Steve Langasek]
> Debian packages shouldn't have to compete with the LSB for its own
> namespace.

Well, assuming that it is a good thing to have cross-distribution
consistency, because this make users more comfortable with moving to
Linux from their current platform, I believe it would be a good thing
to also have consistent naming of init.d script across linux
distributions too.

We do not consider it to compete with POSIX to follow the
specifications and APIs provided by that standard, and most of us
realize that it is an advantage for all distributions that the
functions behave the same across distributions.  We do not consider
the libc API to be Debians namespace.

The same way, system administration tools, documentation and other
administration-related systems will be easier to handle for users and
system administrators if all Linux distribution have consistent naming
for init.d scripts.  I fail to see the advantage of reserving this as
a Debian namespace and consider the LSB as something we do not want to
use to create consistency across distributions in this area.

Time to rename the thread.  Please strop the 'Was'-part when replying.