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

Re: Re-Proposal - preserve freedom of choice of init systems

Hash: SHA384

Ian Jackson dixit:

>I wish to propose the following general resolution, and hereby call

(d-d-a would have been nice, but this time I found it in time.)

>** Begin Proposal **
>0. Rationale
>  Debian has decided (via the technical committee) to change its
>  default init system for the next release. The technical committee
>  decided not to decide about the question of "coupling" i.e. whether
>  other packages in Debian may depend on a particular init system.
>  This GR seeks to preserve the freedom of our users now to select an
>  init system of their choice, and the project's freedom to select a
>  different init system in the future. It will avoid Debian becoming
>  accidentally locked in to a particular init system (for example,
>  because so much unrelated software has ended up depending on a
>  particular init system that the burden of effort required to change
>  init system becomes too great). A number of init systems exist, and
>  it is clear that there is not yet broad consensus as to what the
>  best init system might look like.
>  This GR does not make any comment on the relative merits of
>  different init systems; the technical committee has decided upon the
>  default init system for Linux for jessie.
>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:
>2. Loose coupling of init systems
>  In general, software may not require a specific init system to be
>  pid 1.  The exceptions to this are as follows:
>   * alternative init system implementations
>   * special-use packages such as managers for init systems
>   * cooperating groups of packages intended for use with specific init
>     systems
>  provided that these are not themselves required by other software
>  whose main purpose is not the operation of a specific init system.
>  Degraded operation with some init systems is tolerable, so long as
>  the degradation is no worse than what the Debian project would
>  consider a tolerable (non-RC) bug even if it were affecting all
>  users.  So the lack of support for a particular init system does not
>  excuse a bug nor reduce its severity; but conversely, nor is a bug
>  more serious simply because it is an incompatibility of some software
>  with some init system(s).
>  Maintainers are encouraged to accept technically sound patches
>  to enable improved interoperation with various init systems.
>3. Notes and rubric
>  This resolution is a Position Statement about Issues of the Day
>  (Constitution 4.1.5), triggering the General Resolution override
>  clause in the TC's resolution of the 11th of February.
>  The TC's decision on the default init system for Linux in jessie
>  stands undisturbed.
>  However, the TC resolution is altered to add the additional text
>  in sections (1) and (2) above.
>** End Proposal **


- -- 
<diogenese> Beware of ritual lest you forget the meaning behind it.
<igli> yeah but it means if you really care about something, don't
    ritualise it, or you will lose it. don't fetishise it, don't
    obsess. or you'll forget why you love it in the first place.
Version: GnuPG v1.4.14 (MirBSD)


Reply to: