Re: systemd bug closed - next steps?

[Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk>]

On Sun 21 Sep 2014 at 10:48:51 -0400, Rob Owens wrote:

> Looking for advice from people in the know...
> 
> I submitted a general bug regarding packages which require changing your
> init system to systemd.  I pointed out that this runs counter to
> Debian's goals of supporting multiple init systems.  The bug was closed
> without fixing in a matter of hours.

The title of the bug is "Some packages depend on a particular init
system". Titles can be difficult to frame, so we won't hold you to it,
and it can be altered later to reflect better the nature of the report.
Anyway, the title doesn't look bad to me.

In the body of the mail you set out your stall with

  This bug applies to many desktop applications, and runs counter to Debian's
  goals of supporting multiple init systems.  I classified this bug as
  normal, but I think consideration should be given to classifying it as
  serious.

and

  So installing a cd-burning application triggers a change of my init system.

At this stage one would question on why the bug reporter seems to be
unaware of

  apt-get install sysvinit-core systemd-shim

when it has been advised many times as a practical measure to avoid the
situation outlined. Issuing the command means that installing a
cd-burning application does not trigger a change of the init system. So
that is the claim that it "runs counter to Debian's goals of supporting
multiple init systems" disposed of.

But, hold on, he does know about systemd-shim!

  I know about systemd-shim, and I'll talk about that in a minute.

and then goes on to venture the opinion (framed as a rhetorical
question)

  But is systemd-shim really the solution we need to the problem above?

So, at this stage we have a user who know how to solve his problem but
wants to explore a different, completely unspecified course of action
for unspecified reasons and in an unspecified way. The bug report has
fallen apart; it is only heading into the realms of speculation. No
sensible maintainer or triager is going to follow that route. wontfix or
close?, that is the question. I'd go for close because there is nothing
to fix.

> Perhaps I didn't explain the bug well enough, or maybe I should have
> submitted it elsewhere.  I am hoping to get advice on what to do next,
> or constructive criticism showing me where I went wrong.

What to do next (possibly):

1. Accept the decision; graciously or ungraciously.

2. Read #746578 and #762194.

3. Reopen #762116 and merge it with #746578.