Re: Proposal: General Resolution on Init Systems and systemd Facilities
On 11/18/19 10:43 AM, Holger Levsen wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 16, 2019 at 06:12:49PM +0000, Ian Jackson wrote:
>> Holger Levsen writes ("Re: Proposal: General Resolution on Init Systems and systemd Facilities"):
>>> On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 01:22:26PM -0700, Sean Whitton wrote:
>>>> If we found that the six month delay was repeatedly expiring with no
>>>> serious attempts at non-systemd implementations of the new features, we
>>>> could repeal this GR.
>>> I'm pondering an amendment to copy this option but without the 6 month
>>> delay clause.
>> In practice, we (in Debian as a whole) generally delay things for much
>> longer than that, in order to give people a chance to catch up.
>
> I'd also say, because delays just happen, even though we have many
> people updating software timely in unstable regularily, we also have
> regularily delays. I don't think we should add more artifical delays.
>
> Also, your GR text is unclear when those 6 or 12 months start.
>
> And then, let's says systemd and gnome together develop a feature which
> is then used by gnome, does that mean that also the gnome maintainers
> cannot upload new versions of gnome?
>
>> If you just delete the bit about the delay, what will you replace it
>> with ? If you say 0 delay then it amounts to standardising and
>> recommending in policy a change which actually makes programs buggy as
>> soon as you apply it.
>
> I'd replace:
>
> [...] The
> transition should be smooth for all users. The non-systemd
> community should be given at least 6 months, preferably at least 12
> months, to develop their implementation. (The same goes for any
> future enhancements.)
>
> with
>
> [...] The
> transition should be as smooth as possible for all users including
> those of alternative init systems.
I agree with Holger that it's probably better to leave the amount of
time undefined, and see what happens on a case by case basis.
Cheers,
Thomas Goirand
Reply to: