Hi,
WTF?
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 01:18:18AM +, Debian FTP Masters wrote:
Changed-By: Andreas Moog am...@ubuntu.com
[...]
away (0.9.5+ds-0+nmu2) unstable; urgency=low
.
* Non-maintainer upload
- d/p/01_fix_makefile: $LIBS need to come after $SRC while linking to
fix
Hi...
I have HQ web sites..
All my sites have unique IPs address DA30+ PA 45+ Low OBL unique content
Google indexed USA hosted.
If you are looking for blog post blogroll links please let me know ,
I will offer you very competitive rates and with quality work.
Looking forward to your positive
On 2013-10-24 22:24:05, James McCoy wrote:
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 12:57:37AM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
James wrote:
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 11:40 AM, Steve McIntyre st...@einval.com wrote:
This falsely implies that sticking with Gnome requires replacing the
init system. The only
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 06:48:03AM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
I agree with the people who suggest getting rid of the concept of a
'default' desktop but I don't know how practical it is since not all
users will be capable of choosing a desktop. So we need to develop
some guidance for them. In the
On 10/24/2013 11:08 PM, Uoti Urpala wrote:
Thomas Goirand wrote:
We've been reading again and again from systemd supporters that it's
modular, and that we can use only a subset of it if we like. Now, we're
reading a very different thing: that it's modular *but* we need to
re-implement every
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 08:39:58AM +0100, Marcin Kulisz wrote:
Why should I have installed packages I'm not using and I don't want to
use? I know it's rhetorical question but not all systems are having
enough disk space besides I don't like have packages I'm not using on
my systems. So it's
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 01:47:00AM +0200, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
On Fri, 2013-10-25 at 10:40 +1100, Ben Finney wrote:
Why force
*every* user of the installer to make that choice, when many of them
find the very question to be a needless imposition which makes the
installer
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 01:41:29AM +0200, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
Trying to say [GNOME upstream] continuously try to [...] force their
blessings on all users. is just wrong. Nobody is forced to use Gnome.
Sorry, I've implicitly meant all _of their_ users. My apologies.
I write a
Hullo there,
In a multiarch[1] environment, it is possible to install some packages
for multiple architectures at the same time. These are marked with a
Multi-Arch: same header. Files may be shared between packages with
same name and different architecture provided that their contents are
equal.
On 25.10.2013 08:23, Rene Engelhard wrote:
A NMU for a MINOR bug is NOT something which should be done.
I quietly accepted the dbs one, but this is over the line.
I can understand your rage, but to be clear: I only submitted the bug
and patch, I didn't ask for it to be nmu'ed and was as
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 08:39:58AM +0100, Marcin Kulisz wrote:
This falsely implies that sticking with Gnome requires replacing the
init system. The only requirement is that systemd is installed, not
that it is used as the init system.
That may be the case today, but I personally
Hello,
On 25 October 2013 07:23, Rene Engelhard r...@debian.org wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 01:18:18AM +, Debian FTP Masters wrote:
Changed-By: Andreas Moog am...@ubuntu.com
[...]
away (0.9.5+ds-0+nmu2) unstable; urgency=low
.
* Non-maintainer upload
-
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 10:46:09AM +0200, Andreas Moog wrote:
As you can see from
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/away/0.9.5+ds-0+nmu1ubuntu1 I did
fix it in Ubuntu. Please direct your rage at the person who took the
patch, created a false changelog and uploaded it to Debian.
This may be
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 03:33:56PM +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
Seems I misunderstood what logind was about. I thought it would force to
use specific Xdm implementations that would support it. So you do
confirm that it's not the case, and that we aren't forced into using
GDM? Or is it that
Steve McIntyre steve at einval.com writes:
Pros:
* CD#1 will work again without size worries
* Smaller, simpler desktop
* Works well/better on all supported kernels (?)
* Does not depend on replacing init
Cons:
* please fill in here
IMHO you forgot the crucial part here - why
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 09:00 +0100, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 01:47:00AM +0200, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
On Fri, 2013-10-25 at 10:40 +1100, Ben Finney wrote:
Why force
*every* user of the installer to make that choice, when many of them
find the very
* Lars Wirzenius l...@liw.fi [2013-10-25 10:01]:
(...)
I know how to make the choice. I don't fucking want to. Unless I'm
needing to do a customised install for particular needs, I want Debian
to provide me with defaults that just work. I don't care if the
default choices are the ones I
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Zach Latta z...@zachlatta.com
* Package name: gitignorer
Version : 1.0.0
Upstream Author : Zach Latta z...@zachlatta.com
* URL : https://github.com/zachlatta/gitignorer
* License : MIT
Programming Lang: Go
Description
On 10/25/2013 07:52 AM, Paul Wise wrote:
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 7:47 AM, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
Debian is the Universal OS, isn't it?
Part of being a 'Universal OS' is being useful to as many people as
possible, including people who don't know what a desktop is and
people who
On 25/10/13 10:09, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote:
Changed-By: Andreas Moog am...@ubuntu.com
...
I sponsored Andreas' patch as NMU, on my own initiative.
I don't think it's appropriate to consider a patch in the BTS to be a
request for sponsorship. In future please take responsibility for the
decision
On Fri, 25 Oct 2013 09:21:15 + (UTC)
Ole Laursen o...@hardworking.dk wrote:
Steve McIntyre steve at einval.com writes:
Pros:
* CD#1 will work again without size worries
* Smaller, simpler desktop
* Works well/better on all supported kernels (?)
* Does not depend on replacing
Lars Wirzenius l...@liw.fi writes:
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 01:47:00AM +0200, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
On Fri, 2013-10-25 at 10:40 +1100, Ben Finney wrote:
Why force
*every* user of the installer to make that choice, when many of them
find the very question to be a needless
Le jeudi 24 octobre 2013 à 18:50 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum a écrit :
An even stronger reason to move away from Gnome if the classic mode
disappears.
That's a set of gnome-shell extensions that reproduce the look feel of
GNOME 2 and GNOME 3 classic/fallback mode, not a separate window
+++ Rene Engelhard [2013-10-25 08:23 +0200]:
Hi,
WTF?
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 01:18:18AM +, Debian FTP Masters wrote:
Changed-By: Andreas Moog am...@ubuntu.com
[...]
away (0.9.5+ds-0+nmu2) unstable; urgency=low
.
* Non-maintainer upload
- d/p/01_fix_makefile: $LIBS
Le vendredi 25 octobre 2013 à 00:57 +0100, Steve McIntyre a écrit :
That may be the case today, but I personally think it's abundantly
clear from the current path of Gnome development that sooner or later
it's going to have a hard dependency on using systemd.
How is that a problem?
I mean,
On Fri, 2013-10-25 at 12:33 +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
The old “classic/fallback” mode has not disappeared, it has been renamed
to GNOME Flashback.
But it became less and less usable... even in 3.4 now... many minor bugs
that have accumulated and which you Debian maintainers probably cannot
Le jeudi 24 octobre 2013 à 16:40 +0100, Steve McIntyre a écrit :
This goes back to during the wheezy release cycle. There was a little
discussion around a change in tasksel [1], but rather too late in the
day for the change to make sense. Now we have rather more time, I
feel. Let's change the
Hi,
Ansgar Burchardt ans...@debian.org writes:
How about renaming CD1 to GNOME CD1 and make the minimal installers
prompt which desktop to install? That is no longer having a default
desktop.
The downside would be that one download link would no longer be
enough.
By now I no longer think
On Fri, 2013-10-25 at 12:34 +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
I mean, apart from the pain of seeing a bunch of people who do not
understand what systemd is rant about it?
Taking out the people just rant and/or don't understand it club simply
doesn't help...
Debian should continue to offer free
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 6:52 PM, Andrei POPESCU andreimpope...@gmail.comwrote:
Would LXDE still fit on the same CD? I'm guessing yes, but I'd rather
have it explicit.
Why are we still talking about CDs? Didn't everybody move to DVDs a century
ago? People who want to install Debian on old
Le vendredi 25 octobre 2013 à 12:43 +0200, Christoph Anton Mitterer a
écrit :
Debian should continue to offer free choice of the init system
Why? “Multiple init systems” is not a feature that any of our users
should care of. It is not a functional goal.
And in reality it seems to be far less
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 12:43:04PM +0200, Pau Garcia i Quiles wrote:
Would LXDE still fit on the same CD? I'm guessing yes, but I'd rather
have it explicit.
Why are we still talking about CDs? Didn't everybody move to DVDs a century
ago?
And then they moved away from DVDs too.
I guess we
Hi,
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 11:32:55AM +0100, Wookey wrote:
Really? This is boring stuff that needs doing. I would be grateful if
someone did it for me on one of my packages, assuming they didn't break
anything.
Updating to new upstream versions for tiny packages like this is also
boring. You
Steve McIntyre steve at einval.com writes:
* Does not depend on replacing init
Wasn’t there some mention of xfce needing gnome-settings-daemon as well,
which would kinda defeat the point?
I’d be for IceWM as default setup, as opposed to a full Desktop Environment,
and then people can either
Josselin Mouette joss at debian.org writes:
Debian should continue to offer free choice of the init system
Why? “Multiple init systems” is not a feature that any of our users
should care of. It is not a functional goal.
Of course!
• Developers are users, too.
• The upstart crowd has got
On 25 October 2013 10:00, Olav Vitters o...@vitters.nl wrote:
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 03:33:56PM +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
Seems I misunderstood what logind was about. I thought it would force to
use specific Xdm implementations that would support it. So you do
confirm that it's not the
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 01:41 +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
Wolodja wrote:
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 16:40 +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
This goes back to during the wheezy release cycle. There was a little
discussion around a change in tasksel [1], but rather too late in the
day for the
On Fri, 2013-10-25 at 12:48 +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Why? “Multiple init systems” is not a feature that any of our users
should care of. It is not a functional goal.
Well I guess users *do* care... just look at the posts from the last few
days.
We had users who said stick with sysvinit,
Hi,
* Does not depend on replacing init
Wasn’t there some mention of xfce needing gnome-settings-daemon as well,
which would kinda defeat the point?
Not as far as I can tell:
nik@keks:~ $ apt-rdepends xfce4 | grep gnome
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 12:50 PM, Andrey Rahmatullin w...@wrar.name wrote:
Why are we still talking about CDs? Didn't everybody move to DVDs a
century
ago?
And then they moved away from DVDs too.
I guess we are talking about install images to download (where you usually
don't want to
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 01:29:34PM +0200, Pau Garcia i Quiles wrote:
Why are we still talking about CDs? Didn't everybody move to DVDs a
century
ago?
And then they moved away from DVDs too.
I guess we are talking about install images to download (where you usually
don't want to
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 01:13:48PM +0200, Dominik George wrote:
Wasn’t there some mention of xfce needing gnome-settings-daemon as well,
which would kinda defeat the point?
Not as far as I can tell:
nik@keks:~ $ apt-rdepends xfce4 | grep gnome
On 2013-10-25, Josselin Mouette j...@debian.org wrote:
What are the reasons exactly for deliberately depriving the default
installation’s users of a more complete and featureful desktop?
I've said that for years, but we still haven't changed to KDE Plasma
Desktop as the default.
/troll
/Sune
Lars Wirzenius liw at liw.fi writes:
I write a backup program. It uses its own storage format, and people
sometimes ask if they could use tar files instead. But I am evil
incarnate and FORCE them to use my own storage format instead. Should
[…]
can be, and I think that the storage format I've
On 25/10/13 at 12:33 +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le jeudi 24 octobre 2013 à 18:50 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum a écrit :
An even stronger reason to move away from Gnome if the classic mode
disappears.
I just wanted to point out that this quote is not mine, but Svante's.
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 11:52:16AM +0100, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote:
Simple question: logind is maintained, ConsoleKit is not. I have not
seen anyone raise this. Why?
That one is easy. Both are written by the same predominantly mayor
author and in some ways one project is superset of the
Quoting Adam Borowski (2013-10-25 13:42:48)
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 01:13:48PM +0200, Dominik George wrote:
Wasn’t there some mention of xfce needing gnome-settings-daemon as well,
which would kinda defeat the point?
Not as far as I can tell:
nik@keks:~ $ apt-rdepends xfce4 | grep gnome
xfswitch-plugin - gdm3 - gnome-settings-daemon
xfswitch-plugin is suggested by xfce4-goodies, so irrelevant for this
discussion.
However, I must admit that even if the standard XFCE installation does
not depend on systemd, it would be even worse if a user came along and
wanted to extend
Jonas Smedegaard dr at jones.dk writes:
xfswitch-plugin is suggested by xfce4-goodies, so irrelevant for this
discussion.
Fair enough, but
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.debian.devel.general/187596
suggests that, given a ConsoleKit removal, xfce still depends
on systemd just like GNOME.
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 02:02:48PM +0200, Dominik George wrote:
However, I must admit that even if the standard XFCE installation does
not depend on systemd, it would be even worse if a user came along and
wanted to extend their user experience by installing some XFCE addon and
*that* would
On 2013-10-25, Dominik George n...@naturalnet.de wrote:
However, I must admit that even if the standard XFCE installation does
not depend on systemd, it would be even worse if a user came along and
wanted to extend their user experience by installing some XFCE addon and
*that* would magically
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 12:40:35PM +0200, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
So to me the classc/fallback frontier seems to be a rather dark field...
it's nice that you guys try to keep it working in Debian, but quite
apparently GNOME upstream wants to ultimately get rid of it, and that
*will*
Jonathan Dowland jmtd at debian.org writes:
Installing systemd does not magically switch your init system.
Not *yet*. But it will, shortly.
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.debian.devel.general/187556
bye,
//mirabilos, explicitly omitting his own guesses on the timeframe
--
To
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 01:06:02PM +0100, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 02:02:48PM +0200, Dominik George wrote:
However, I must admit that even if the standard XFCE installation does
not depend on systemd, it would be even worse if a user came along and
wanted to extend
On 25/10/13 11:52, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote:
- using XDG_* environment variables, instead of LOGIND_* or SYSTEMD_*
variables
I assume you mainly mean XDG_RUNTIME_DIR here, since the rest are
basically user-level rather than system-level.
The point of the XDG_* family of variables is that
Thorsten Glaser tg at mirbsd.de writes:
• Your primary use case appears to be “the desktop”, whereas Debian, as
opposed to some of its downstreams and Pure Blends, is a Universal OS,
which means it’s got much more servers in use, which don’t benefit from
systemd either at all or at least
Pau Garcia i Quiles wrote:
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 6:52 PM, Andrei POPESCU
andreimpope...@gmail.comwrote:
Would LXDE still fit on the same CD? I'm guessing yes, but I'd rather
have it explicit.
Why are we still talking about CDs? Didn't everybody move to DVDs a century
ago? People who want to
On Fri, 25 Oct 2013 12:41:26 +0200
Josselin Mouette j...@debian.org wrote:
Le jeudi 24 octobre 2013 à 16:40 +0100, Steve McIntyre a écrit :
This goes back to during the wheezy release cycle. There was a
little discussion around a change in tasksel [1], but rather too
late in the day for
On Oct 25, Steve McIntyre st...@einval.com wrote:
We've had this discussion multiple times over the years. I've been
told multiple times that we still have a non-negligible set of users
owning/running hardware that can't do DVDs. I'm not 100% convinced
I can pull random statistics out of my
On Fri, 2013-10-25 at 13:31 +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
We've had this discussion multiple times over the years. I've been
told multiple times that we still have a non-negligible set of users
owning/running hardware that can't do DVDs. I'm not 100% convinced
myself of how large or critical
On 2013-10-25, Steve McIntyre st...@einval.com wrote:
We've had this discussion multiple times over the years. I've been
told multiple times that we still have a non-negligible set of users
owning/running hardware that can't do DVDs. I'm not 100% convinced
myself of how large or critical this
On Fri, 25 Oct 2013 12:34:34 +0200
Josselin Mouette j...@debian.org wrote:
Le vendredi 25 octobre 2013 à 00:57 +0100, Steve McIntyre a écrit :
That may be the case today, but I personally think it's abundantly
clear from the current path of Gnome development that sooner or
later it's
On Oct 25, Neil Williams codeh...@debian.org wrote:
If someone comes up with good reasons to consider systemd on it's own
merit, I'm willing to consider it. With the current approach of a
The arguments for a modern init system have been discussed over and
over.
I do not mind replacing gnome
It is more and more obvious that modern software needs an event-based
init system.
Pros:
- more features
- stable support for advanced boot/SAN environments
- being more similar to one of the other relevant distributions (RHEL or
Ubuntu)
- things like gnome become easier to package
Cons:
-
On Oct 25, Thorsten Glaser t...@mirbsd.de wrote:
• Your primary use case appears to be “the desktop”, whereas Debian, as
opposed to some of its downstreams and Pure Blends, is a Universal OS,
which means it’s got much more servers in use, which don’t benefit from
systemd either at all
On Oct 25, Christoph Anton Mitterer cales...@scientia.net wrote:
Why? “Multiple init systems” is not a feature that any of our users
should care of. It is not a functional goal.
Well I guess users *do* care... just look at the posts from the last few
days.
Just because some people have
]] Thorsten Glaser
Jonathan Dowland jmtd at debian.org writes:
Installing systemd does not magically switch your init system.
Not *yet*. But it will, shortly.
No, it won't.
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.debian.devel.general/187556
I'm not saying that in that article. Please
On Fri, 2013-10-25 at 13:31 +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
We've had this discussion multiple times over the years. I've been
told multiple times that we still have a non-negligible set of users
owning/running hardware that can't do DVDs.
The set of hardware which can't boot from DVDs *or* boot
On 25 October 2013 13:13, Simon McVittie s...@debian.org wrote:
On 25/10/13 11:52, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote:
- using XDG_* environment variables, instead of LOGIND_* or SYSTEMD_*
variables
I assume you mainly mean XDG_RUNTIME_DIR here, since the rest are
basically user-level rather than
Let the war begin... ;)
On Fri, 2013-10-25 at 14:29 +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
Pros:
- stable support for advanced boot/SAN environments
How far is this:
https://wiki.debian.org/AdvancedStartupShutdownWithMultilayeredBlockDevices
really supported now?
- things like gnome become easier to
On Fri, 25 Oct 2013 14:29:54 +0200
m...@linux.it (Marco d'Itri) wrote:
It is more and more obvious that modern software needs an event-based
init system.
Pros:
- more features
- stable support for advanced boot/SAN environments
- being more similar to one of the other relevant
On 25/10/13 13:57, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote:
No, I mean:
XDG_VTNR=7
XDG_SESSION_ID=c1
XDG_SESSION_PATH=/org/freedesktop/DisplayManager/Session0
XDG_SEAT_PATH=/org/freedesktop/DisplayManager/Seat0
XDG_SEAT=seat0
Oh, I wasn't aware of those... yes, using that namespace without a XDG
On Wed, 16 Oct 2013 19:49:54 +0200
Dominik George n...@naturalnet.de wrote:
Hi,
The only problem is that on small machines (things like the BeagleBone)
xz compression requires enough memory that you have to enable swap to
use dpkg. Now on a machine with a sensible disk this is not a
Hi Steve, thanks for starting this discussion.
I was quite intrigued by the responses which challenged whether we need
a default at all, but if we accept that a default is required (as you
outline and as others have said), I have two separate thoughts to
ponder about proceeding:
• we define
That looked unintentionally *great* in my mutt, half of it got
interpreted and coloured as quotes, giving a chrome feel.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 03:33:42PM +0200, Marko Randjelovic wrote:
correct me if I'm wrong, but it appears to me that xz compression has
become the default in dpkg. With that in mind, won't this issue come up
anyway? I mean, once a maintainer fixes a bug in a pckage and uplods it,
the
2013/10/25 Neil Williams codeh...@debian.org:
On Fri, 25 Oct 2013 14:29:54 +0200
m...@linux.it (Marco d'Itri) wrote:
It is more and more obvious that modern software needs an event-based
init system.
Pros:
- more features
- stable support for advanced boot/SAN environments
- being more
Hi there, Olav, thanks for contributing to the discussion,
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 01:40:55PM +0200, Olav Vitters wrote:
I don't see this happening, at all. When the GNOME release team is asked
for a solution we make *concrete* decisions: use X, or Y or maybe try
and support both. If you want
Steve McIntyre st...@einval.com writes:
We *could* just drop all the CD sets and be done with it, just keeping
the netinst CD and the DVDs. Is that what people really want?
As a longtime Debian user, that would suit me fine -- I've not done a
Debian installation using anything other than
Ole Laursen olau at hardworking.dk writes:
For instance: I have in the past had downtime on servers I maintain
because
Debian out of the box doesn't babysit processes. Apache or MySQL hit by a
random once-in-a-year irreproducible crash? Boom.
Hm, fun. I don’t usually run into those, but then
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 01:41:23PM +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
There is no good reason other than that's the way GNOME has been
written. So change the code and get GNOME to behave properly.
Because you raise this again:
- No maintenance on ConsoleKit since 1.5 years, despite me/GNOME raising
Christoph Anton Mitterer calestyo at scientia.net writes:
Let the war begin... ;)
I’m looking for someone to help me formulate a GR (since I know
I’m not good in formulating things that don’t offend anyone, and
in English) that states that Debian will support several init
systems (sysvinit with
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 11:14:41AM +0100, Philip Hands wrote:
maintenance. I seriously doubt that us switching away from Gnome will
have a detectable negative impact on Gnome's rate of development, so the
average quality of our offerings on the desktop, and the quality of that
choice for all
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 02:03:38PM +, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
Christoph Anton Mitterer calestyo at scientia.net writes:
Let’s GR it.
Let's tech committee it :)
Cheers,
Paul
--
.''`. Paul Tagliamonte paul...@debian.org
: :' : Proud Debian Developer
`. `'` 4096R / 8F04 9AD8 2C92 066C
On Fri, October 25, 2013 15:09, Neil Williams wrote:
I disagree that this is achievable as a single switch. Backports spring
to mind, security updates too will have to retain support for the init
system in use in stable currently where that support existed in the
package being backported at
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013, at 16:19, Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
Let’s GR it.
Let's tech committee it :)
I was just going to say the same. I don't think we need a full GR,
let's just shove it to tech-ctte, so they can make an informed decision.
We have the Tech CTTE for this type of decisions after
Paul Tagliamonte paultag at debian.org writes:
This means by adopting logind, we should switch init over to systemd,
otherwise a major package is using another major package in an
unsupported configuration (or at least in a way that the maintainer
doesn't wish to support)
No, it doesn’t mean
Paul Tagliamonte paultag at debian.org writes:
Let’s GR it.
Let's tech committee it :)
I’d ask them to solve the situation of gnome/xfce depending on systemd,
or something like that, but not a decision whether we want to support
one or multiple init systems, and if not all currently
On Fri, 25 Oct 2013 14:03:38 + (UTC)
Thorsten Glaser t...@mirbsd.de wrote:
Christoph Anton Mitterer calestyo at scientia.net writes:
Let the war begin... ;)
I’m looking for someone to help me formulate a GR (since I know
I’m not good in formulating things that don’t offend anyone,
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 02:27:44PM +, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
Paul Tagliamonte paultag at debian.org writes:
Let’s GR it.
Let's tech committee it :)
I’d ask them to solve the situation of gnome/xfce depending on systemd,
or something like that, but not a decision whether we want
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013, at 16:27, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
Paul Tagliamonte paultag at debian.org writes:
Let’s GR it.
Let's tech committee it :)
I’d ask them to solve the situation of gnome/xfce depending on systemd,
or something like that, but not a decision whether we want to support
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 09:39:03AM -0400, Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
Hi there, Olav, thanks for contributing to the discussion,
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 01:40:55PM +0200, Olav Vitters wrote:
I don't see this happening, at all. When the GNOME release team is asked
for a solution we make
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 02:11:28PM +, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
It does mean that _installing_ GNOME/systemd needs to switch the
init system over.
Supporting two different init systems is something I don't think
*anyone* wants to get into. Remember they use different files, so this
will result
From: Andrew Kane ak...@freegeekseattle.org
Date: Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 6:55 AM
Subject: Re: Proposal: switch default desktop to xfce
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 6:09 AM, Ian Campbell i...@hellion.org.uk wrote:
On Fri, 2013-10-25 at 13:31 +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
...I've been
told
* Tollef Fog Heen tfh...@err.no [131024 15:06]:
]] Marvin Renich
I believe that systemd/GNOME upstream is intentionally coupling the two
in order to force adoption of systemd.
You're aware that GNOME and systemd upstreams are two completely
distinct groups with (AFAIK) very little
Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 01:40:55PM +0200, Olav Vitters wrote:
I don't see this happening, at all. When the GNOME release team is asked
for a solution we make *concrete* decisions: use X, or Y or maybe try
and support both. If you want to influence these decisions, I
Paul Tagliamonte paultag at debian.org writes:
Decide any technical matter where Developers' jurisdictions overlap.
This is more or less a political question (and one of trust and one to
FINALLY decide what package maintainers and porters can depend on, so
that we can move on).
Also, I’d
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 05:04:47PM +0200, Bastien beudart wrote:
Let's tech committee it :)
It seems that the tech committee is composed of two well known ubuntu
developers.
Isn't that biased? I mean do you see them voting against upstart, I know that
the decision
should be based
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 03:02:55PM +, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
Paul Tagliamonte paultag at debian.org writes:
Decide any technical matter where Developers' jurisdictions overlap.
This is more or less a political question (and one of trust and one to
FINALLY decide what package
2013/10/25 Thorsten Glaser t...@mirbsd.de:
Paul Tagliamonte paultag at debian.org writes:
Decide any technical matter where Developers' jurisdictions overlap.
This is more or less a political question (and one of trust and one to
FINALLY decide what package maintainers and porters can
1 - 100 of 289 matches
Mail list logo
