[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Proposal - preserve freedom of choice of init systems

Colin Watson <cjwatson@debian.org> writes:

> On Sun, Mar 02, 2014 at 12:49:22PM -0500, Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
>> On Sun, Mar 02, 2014 at 12:35:15PM +0000, Ian Jackson wrote:
>> > As a consequence, the GR replaces the outcome of the TC vote.  The GR
>> > text explicitly adopts the existing TC decision on the default, and
>> > adds to it.
> [...]
>>   2) Dishonest (using an unrelated GR to turn over the default init
>>      decision made through a backdoor you put in)
> Huh?  Ian explicitly says, as does the text itself, that this proposed
> GR *adopts* the TC decision on the default init system.  It doesn't
> overturn it.

The part I don't understand is why reference is made to any TC decision
at all.  Unless the objectives include overturning the decision on the
default Linux init system for jessie, I see no reason to invoke the GR
clause in that resolution at all.

Why isn't this just a standalone GR asserting a "position statement
about issues of the day" on the coupling question?


Attachment: pgpkd0UxrQj9l.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: