Re: Can't We Have Another Vote for Systemd
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 09/25/2014 02:01 AM, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> On Jo, 25 sep 14, 14:28:19, Hörmetjan Yiltiz wrote:
>> I hope you all can realize how much I do NOT want to open yet
>> again another issue on #NotSystemd topic.
>
> No.
>
>> Seeing that the issue is still going on and on for almost from
>> the moment Debian decided to use systemd, and also considering
>> the fact that the vote was actually a tie, and it was decided by
>> the ballot of the ruler.
>>
>> Debian wiki says this:
>>
>> Fedora, OpenSuSE, Arch and Mageia have already made the choice to
>> use systemd, and it is getting excellent upstream support for a
>> growing number of packages.
>
> I'm assuming there should have been some space here or something to
> make it clear that what follows is *not* from the wiki.
>
>> Yet it is very clear to all Debian users that Debian is unique,
>> unlike any of those above, especially when it comes to Debian
>> Policy and its goal. And Debian did not have to make any decision
>> based on other distro's decision. Debian rules! Furthermore,
>> `excellent upstream support' is highly unlikely or at least
>> pretty controversial among Debian users and devs, unless
>> `support' is defined as compelling "freedom" by a few
>> propagandists.
>>
>> https://wiki.debian.org/Debate/initsystem/systemd#Why_Debian_should_default_to_systemd
>>
>>
>>
Please let there be another vote!
>
> If you mean by users it would be meaningless and repeating the TC
> vote would make Debian's constitution a farce. A General Resolution
> has been proposed and didn't even gather enough sponsors (5
> required out of about 1000 Debian Members).
>
> This isn't doing any good to anyone.
>
> Kind regards, Andrei
>
Do you have the link to TC vote Andrei? Please.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJUJJ9fAAoJEKbsEnZGVkUMBakH/3nB9Sql+TAX/FW2FL7SNujY
E9qehCu7lNgyw4Gvmr+VX5d9l+ET9tQWq5axB7aHm5Tw+OUj5r8u1bVfjKFWynmu
PDJ6Bf8hwiYwKq/sMWjnaYPf3uFrEchDhQJqJjVcHutQAKYi6cRHdr91HNgpA82l
7OFnqEEpesfRCtBHSQDabxCRU4b6OL0SdGKXgvahPljqPGzXWJCGEMXGuq01JA5t
AN0JJC5+SG5hK3olXV4trt4L14HqO2IRz2g4TSYdlp7HmSYyDmweoekpho5IoHQp
q51Sn3aOOt+xoYEoM2FgxXx9kUSZLd4Xzu6zytpZqgmgMZrlE6Obt2WqxV8NxAM=
=DkuZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: