On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 04:35:31PM +1100, Brian May wrote: > I think the result of this GR would be any bug along the lines of "XYZ > won't work with initd system ZYX" would be treated as RC (release > critical). Which sounds good, except: > > * They left it to the last minute before the freeze. > > * I don't believe it actually is a problem any more. Gnome no longer > depends on systemd (there are some bugs that have been ironed out in > unstable, and just need to propagate through to testing).
apparently this is the case at the moment, which makes now a perfect time to have it made into policy - no additional work is required to comply. if we wait until there is a lot of work to be done then it will be declared an impossible task. not having such a policy would make it acceptable to have stealth or forced conversions to systemd via Depends. it's already hard work to avoid having systemd auto-installed on upgrade - making it impossible would mean that all the rhetoric about systemd being "only the default init system, users can choose" a sadistally obvious lie. > If people really want init system XYZ to work, somebody will do the > work to do this. Trying to force the maintainer to do something via a > GR and RC bugs isn't going to work. you could say the same thing about any debian policy - requiring a package to conform to debian's numerous policies is forcing the maintainer to do something. IMO complying with policy is a hugely important part of what it takes to get a package into debian...if you're not willing to do the work, then don't submit a half-arsed non-compliant job. craig -- craig sanders <[email protected]> _______________________________________________ luv-main mailing list [email protected] http://lists.luv.asn.au/listinfo/luv-main
