Re: Re-Proposing: General Resolution on Init Systems and systemd
On Wed, Nov 20, 2019 at 02:41:19PM +0000, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Kurt Roeckx writes ("Re: Re-Proposing: General Resolution on Init Systems and systemd"):
> > The update should be available on the website now.
>
> Hi, thanks. I looked at the version here
>
> https://www.debian.org/vote/2019/vote_002
>
> and it is missing some of the paragraph breaks compared to the
> actually proposed text here
>
> https://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2019/11/msg00163.html
>
> For example, clause 5 of the proposal is two paragraphs. I think this
> is just a transcription error from the HTML. Similarly for 7, 9 and
> 11.
>
> Also, the bullet list in clause 9 has not come out right.
>
> The changes look easy - add some <p> and <ul> and <li>.
>
> If you like I could send you a diff to fix it, in case please point me
> to the source.
It's in: git@salsa.debian.org:webmaster-team/webwml.git
Jean-Pierre Giraud applied this patch:
--- a/english/vote/2019/vote_002.wml
+++ b/english/vote/2019/vote_002.wml
@@ -241,7 +241,7 @@ patches to include.
<h4>SYSTEMD DEPENDENCIES</h4>
-<p>3. Ideally, packages should should be fully functional with all init
+<p>3. Ideally, packages 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
@@ -334,7 +334,7 @@ patches to include.
<p>10. In general, maintainers of competing software, including
maintainers of the various competing init systems, should be
- accomodating to each others' needs. This includes the needs and
+ accommodating to each others' needs. This includes the needs and
convenience of users of reasonable non-default configurations.
<p>11. Negative general comments about software and their communities,
So I formally propose those changes.
I think I've fixed the formatting, it's committed, not pushed yet.
Kurt
Reply to: