Re: [draft] Draft text on Init Systems GR
Russ Allbery <rra@debian.org> writes:
> Ansgar <ansgar@43-1.org> writes:
>> So three hypothetical examples:
>> - a hypothetical GNOME version that requires a build-time choice
>> between `systemd --user` and the traditional session implementation;
>> (GNOME can use `systemd --user` already[1], but it's not a build-time
>> choice.) I guess elogind could in theory start a `systemd --user`
>> instance even when pid-1 is not systemd, but it's probably not
>> realistic to expect that to be implemented.
> The criteria here under Ian's proposal is stated in point 8, "But such
> contributions should not impose nontrivial risks on users of the default
> configuration (systemd with Recommends installed)." So it would be a
> determination of the GNOME maintainers, appealable to the Technical
> Committee, whether using the traditional session implementation would
> impose a nontrivial risk to the users of the default configuration.
> If the traditional session implementation has RC bugs, point 7 would also
> apply and would be a strong argument in favor of switching to systemd
> --user.
Ah, I think this is making me realize there's a somewhat odd conflict
between point 7 and point 8 that I didn't notice. The criteria in point 7
is stronger (the contributed support does not introduce an RC bug) than in
point 8 (the contributed change does not impose non-trivial risks on users
of the default configuration), and now I'm unsure which would apply here.
I think the best approach would be that the point 7 criteria (the patch
needs to be applied unless it introduces an RC bug) should apply if the
sysvinit support doesn't change behavior substantially under systemd, and
the point 8 criteria should apply if it does. So, for instance, changing
the packaging to build two versions of the GNOME stack, one requiring
systemd and one not, would use the point 7 criteria, but changing the
build options for everyone to use the mechanism compatible with
non-systemd systems would use the point 8 criteria. But it's not clear to
me that Ian's text says this.
--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <https://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Reply to: