Alexandre SIMON escribió: > > We still believe that InitNG is today a really good replacement to > init. We follow the discussion in the mailing-list but we did not write > anything about changes, today we want to express our opinion : > > - concept of InitNG is a good one > > - ifiles syntax is simple and clear (and easy to use to write new > services and daemons) >
I hope you like the new service_file syntax. > - from the beginning we believed that the development of the core and > the rest (ifiles) must be separated. InitNG should concentrate on the > development of the core to propose new functionalities and to make it > more robust and stable. Why not having different teams : one for the > core, and other dedicated to distributions (debian, gentoo, ...) which > should write ifiles for these distributions ? The problem is that we have not sufficient people to write scripts... > We are a little bite anxious and we are waiting for you about next > changes and for the future of InitNG. We don't want to drop out InitNG > but we hope that it'll continue in the same way of philosophy and > simplicity. Maybe it could be interesting to express some drafts about > the roadmap and the development. The priority is to get rid of all the stuff that bloats the core; but before that we will be releasing 0.6.10 :). I'm working a bit on the service_file plugin. You should try it ;).
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- _______________________________________________ Initng mailing list [email protected] http://jw.dyndns.org/mailman/listinfo/initng
