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

Re: [draft] Draft text on Init Systems GR

Russ Allbery writes ("Re: [draft] Draft text on Init Systems GR"):
> I wish that a GR had the moral suasion that would get everyone to be
> excellent to each other, but I'm somewhat dubious.  I'm not a huge fan of
> trying to tackle that in the same GR as the technical questions, but I
> respect why you want to do so and I would still vote this above further
> discussion.
> >  * Ideally, packages should not Depend on or Recommend systemd, and
> >    should be fully functional with all init systems.  This means (for
> >    example) that daemons should ship traditional init scripts, or use
> >    other mechanisms to ensure that they are started without systemd.
> >    It also means that desktop software should be installable, and
> >    ideally fully functional, without systemd.
> I think using Depend and Recommend here adds more confusion than clarity
> since a lot of software doesn't Depend or Recommend systemd the package.
> Instead, the dependency is on libpam-systemd or systemd-sysv or udev, and
> there are different mechanisms in place to handle (or not handle) those.

I have changed this to delete the part about Depends etc.  Now it
reads simply.

 | Ideally, packages should should be fully functional with all init
 | systems.

> >    If policy consensus cannot be reached on such a facility, the
> >    Technical Committee should decide based on the project's wishes as
> >    expressed in this GR.
> This all sounds workable to me as a Policy editor.


> >  * Negative general comments about software and their communities,
> >    including both about systemd itself and about non-systemd init
> >    systems, are strongly deprecated.
> This sense of deprecated is (I think) en_UK, or at least it reads oddly to
> this en_US reader.  I'm mentally translating it as "discouraged," but I
> wonder if something like "are not acceptable within the Debian Project"
> might be closer to the meaning you're intending.

"discouraged" will do.

Thanks for the comments.


Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk>   These opinions are my own.

If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is
a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.

Reply to: