Re: Proposal - preserve freedom of choice of init systems
* Kurt Roeckx (firstname.lastname@example.org) [140302 12:23]:
> On Sun, Mar 02, 2014 at 11:01:16AM +0000, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > Kurt Roeckx writes ("Re: Proposal - preserve freedom of choice of init systems"):
> > > This is probably going to require a 2:1 majority requirement as
> > > written.
> > Do you agree that the intent can be achieved by something requiring a
> > 1:1 majority ? If so, can you please say how.
> > If you're going to say we need to replace "the TC resolution is
> > amended" with something like "we wish that instead the TC had decided
> > blah", then please reconsider. That would force the GR to avoid
> > saying what its own effect is, which is unnecessarily confusing.
> > Also, writing that text is very cumbersome.
> The text currently says it's using the TC's power to decide
> something, and so would fall under 4.1.4. I think the intent of
> this GR is not to override the TC's decision about the default, so
> I'm currently not sure what to suggest.
I don't see why the text couldn't just say that the developers make a
position statement. As per 4.1.5 this could be done with a