Re: [draft] Draft text on Init Systems GR
Holger Levsen writes:
> On Thu, Nov 07, 2019 at 01:04:20PM -0500, Sam Hartman wrote:
>> version 2330c05afa4
>> Choice 3: systemd without Diversity as a Priority
> I guess this option will get ammendments:
> a.) 'systemd without diversity as a priority' sounds like systemd is
> against diversity. I think this is borderline insulting. So I expect
> this will attract someone proposing another option called 'Embrace
> the future (*) and a modern init system' or such.
> *) or 'Embrace new technologies...'
> On top of all of this, systemd provides much more features than unit
> files as the thread on -devel showed. There is no word about these
> technologies in this GR proposal. I think that's a flaw in this
Maybe something along the lines of "Embrace tooling diversity and
This is about allowing experimenting with and possibly adopting new
tools (sysusers, tmpfiles, ...) and making cross-distribution work
easier by standardizing "boring" aspects of packaging such as how to
create service accounts.
We already have people complaining that source packages are "too Debian
specific" and should be replaced. The tooling above is even more of a
problem as third parties currently have to deal with way too many
different ways to even before getting to packaging which is inherently
more package-manager- and thus distribution(-familiy)-specific.
On the other side, we have Debian-specific, least common denominator
tooling that is hard to change.