[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: