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

[Nikolaus Rath <Nikolaus@rath.org>]

Jonas Smedegaard <dr@jones.dk> writes:
> Quoting Nikolaus Rath (2014-10-19 20:21:59)
>> Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk> writes:
>>> David Weinehall writes ("Re: Alternative proposal: support for alternative init systems is desirable but not mandatory"):
>>>> OK, so packaging uselessd (thus providing another init system that 
>>>> provides -- most of -- the systemd interfaces) would solve all your 
>>>> worries?
>>>
>>> This resolution will be interpreted by humans, specifically 
>>> individual maintainers, the TC, and the release team - not by robots.
>>
>> Presumably some maintainers would consider uselessd an alternate init 
>> system - and others will not. In that case the GR seems have achieved 
>> effectively nothing.
>
> If there was a secret agenda e.g. to annoy systemd then you are right 
> that such trick that you now thought up would mean that this GR was a 
> waste of time.

I just don't understand why you consider uselessd a "trick" that I came
up with (leaving alone the fact that David brought it up here, and that
yet another guy started the project).


Best,
-Nikolaus

-- 
GPG encrypted emails preferred. Key id: 0xD113FCAC3C4E599F
Fingerprint: ED31 791B 2C5C 1613 AF38 8B8A D113 FCAC 3C4E 599F

             »Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a Banana.«