On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 11:23:11AM -0800, Don Armstrong wrote: > On Tue, 28 Jan 2014, Neil McGovern wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 11:05:18AM -0800, Don Armstrong wrote: > > > Where feasible, software should interoperate with non-default init > > > systems; maintainers are encouraged to accept technically sound > > > patches to enable interoperation, even if it results in degraded > > > operation. > > > > > > > Did you mean "degraded operation while running under the non-default > > init." or "degraded operation while running under the default init."? > > The former. So : > > Where feasible, software should interoperate with non-default init > systems; maintainers are encouraged to accept technically sound > patches to enable interoperation, even if it results in degraded > operation while running under the non-default init. Maybe I'm dense...
Scenario: Let's say that OpenRC is the new default init and in the meanwhile, Gnome has gained a dependency on systemd. A patch to support Upstart in Gnome is posted that partially breaks the functionality under systemd. By your wording, maintainers are encouraged to accept the patch. Zbyszek -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
