Josselin Mouette writes ("Bug#727708: init system coupling etc."):
> In all cases, it is unacceptable to put the burden of implementing
> logind on non-systemd systems on maintainers of packages that just need
> the logind interfaces. If it is not available, software such as gdm3
> will depend, directly or indirectly, on systemd as PID 1, and that will
> be all.Firstly, I think the scenario where the required integration work is not done is unlikely. But in that scenario, we have two choices: (a) Effectively, drop all init systems other than systemd (b) Effectively, drop GNOME Of these, (b) is IMO clearly preferable. Our downstreams can straightforwardly provide a more specific Debian derivative which runs GNOME and (only) systemd. Asking our downstreams to reintroduce support for a non-systemd init system is not feasible. With (a) the only option for people who didn't want systemd would be to either fork the whole of the Debian project and declare themselves a new upstream for all of what Debian now does, or to abandon Debian and its derivatives altogether. With (b) people who want GNOME and systemd can do that work as a Debian derivative; it is not necessary to fork the whole project. The doomsday scenario of choosing between (a) and (b) becomes less likely if we make it clear how bad it would be. We need to provide appropriate backpressure to encourage upstream decisions that support the continued freedom of our users. Ian. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
