Bug#932704: debian-policy: Don't force sysvinit compatibility if e.g. alternate init required
Hi,
On Sun, 2019-09-22 at 16:13 -0400, David Steele wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 2:10 PM Sean Whitton <spwhitton@spwhitton.name> wrote:
> > The Policy Editors have decided that dropping the requirement to ship
> > init scripts is not something that can be decided by means of the Policy
> > Changes Process, at least for the time being.
> >
> > In proposing and reviewing wording to resolve this bug, then, we should
> > be careful not to weaken the requirement to ship init scripts.
> > Otherwise, in resolving this bug we would be changing the requirements
> > to ship init scripts by means of the Policy Changes Process.
> >
> > I'm suggesting this be kept in mind. It need not result in a wordier
> > change, and I certainly agree with you that we should assume good faith
> > on the part of package maintainers.
> >
>
> Candidate language attached. It adds "Also excepted are packages which require a
> feature of an alternate init system which is not available in SysV-Style
> init systems.". Thoughts?
I don't think there is a way to get such changes through the policy
process as Sean said (I tried to document what I see as current
practice in #911165). Practically the project seems to have already
decided that this is fine, even for packages that don't require
systemd:
+---
| There are 1033 non-overridden instances of lintian detecting a
| service unit without an init.d script [7].
+---[ https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2019/09/msg00001.html ]
Ansgar
Reply to: