Re: Proposal - preserve freedom of choice of init systems

[Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk>]

Kurt Roeckx writes ("Re: Proposal - preserve freedom of choice of init systems"):
> On Sun, Mar 02, 2014 at 12:35:15PM +0000, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > This a GR proposal is a "position statement about issues of the day"
> > (as it says in the "Notes and rubric".)  It's on the subject of init
> > systems.  Therefore it is covered by this wording.
> 
> But it also says:
> 1. Exercise of the TC's power to set policy
> 
>   For jessie and later releases, the TC's power to set technical
>   policy (Constitution 6.1.1) is exercised as follows:

Yes.  That is part of the text which is added to the TC decision of
the 11th of February, by virtue of the GR override clause in that
decision.  As the rubric says, s1 and s2 of the GR text are added to
that TC decision text.  s1 of the GR text is not freestanding.

Putting the "notes and rubric" section first might make this clearer
for you to see, but it would make the whole GR text much less clear to
read because it would start with several paragraphs of procedural
palaver.

Ian.