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

Re: Alternative proposal: support for alternative init systems is desirable but not mandatory



Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> It is now clear that we will have a vote on this issue. I think that we
> should use this opportunity to clarify the Project's position, and that's
> not something that would be achieved if "Further Discussion" were to
> win.
> 
> I am therefore bringing forward an alternative proposal, deeply inspired
> from the "Advice: sysvinit compatibility in jessie and multiple init
> support" option of the TC resolution on init system coupling[1], which
> was originally written by Russ Allbery[2] and was then amended by many
> participants to the discussion in February 2014.

I am very uncomfortable with GRs being used to set technical policy. 
We have never before has a GR that did so. It can lock us into technical
decisions which we then need a whole other GR process to get us out of.
And mass voting on technical minutia is no way to run a distribution.

Why not just make your proposal be something along the lines of
reaffirming the technical decision-making process as it currently
stands, from the package maintainers, to the policy, to the TC.
It could implicitly or explicitly reaffirm both recent TC decisions on
init systems.

-- 
see shy jo

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: