Hi,
the main problem I see with this GR is that it is in essence a rehash of
the GR[1] we had in 2014, with pretty much the same options minus the one
that won, "A GR is not required."
> Choice 1: Affirm Init Diversity
The way this is worded is even stronger than in the 2014 GR, which made
allow
On Sat, Nov 09, 2019 at 06:08:54PM +0100, Simon Richter wrote:
> the main problem I see with this GR is that it is in essence a rehash of
> the GR[1] we had in 2014, with pretty much the same options minus the one
> that won, "A GR is not required."
The option that won is worded like this:
"""
The
Simon Richter writes:
> the main problem I see with this GR is that it is in essence a rehash of
> the GR[1] we had in 2014, with pretty much the same options minus the
> one that won, "A GR is not required."
I voted that option in 2014 and definitely will not be voting that option
today, for th
On Sat, Nov 09, 2019 at 06:08:54PM +0100, Simon Richter wrote:
> (Option 1.1.1)
>
> Automated variant transitions shall be supported.
>
> [Rationale: moving from systemd to sysvinit is currently an involved manual
> process, so unavailable to anyone not already skilled in Unix
> administration, c
Hi Martin,
On Sat, Nov 09, 2019 at 01:37:13PM +0100, Martin Pitt wrote:
> Hello Wouter,
>
> Wouter Verhelst [2019-11-09 10:32 +0200]:
> > > Choice 1: Affirm Init Diversity
> > >
> > > Being able to run Debian systems with init systems other than systemd
> > > continues to be something that the p
Hi,
On Sat, Nov 09, 2019 at 10:01:27AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > (Option 1)
> > The Debian Project aims at providing the greatest configuration flexibility
> > while maintaining a sensible default installation for end users. To that
> > end, we document functional dependencies in a machine-
On Sa 09 Nov 2019 19:09:35 CET, Holger Levsen wrote:
On Sat, Nov 09, 2019 at 06:08:54PM +0100, Simon Richter wrote:
(Option 1.1.1)
Automated variant transitions shall be supported.
[Rationale: moving from systemd to sysvinit is currently an involved manual
process, so unavailable to anyone n
Hi,
On Do 07 Nov 2019 19:59:49 CET, Sam Hartman wrote:
No, the difference intended between choice 2 and 3 is about how we
handle technologies like elogind, or a mythical technology that parsed
sysusers files, rather than how we handle starting daemons.
I'd suggest leaving elogind entirely ou
Hi Holger,
On Sat, Nov 09, 2019 at 06:09:35PM +, Holger Levsen wrote:
> > [Rationale: moving from systemd to sysvinit is currently an involved manual
> > process, so unavailable to anyone not already skilled in Unix
> > administration, creating an artificial barrier.]
> please clarify what y
Hi Mike,
On Sat, Nov 09, 2019 at 09:48:03PM +, Mike Gabriel wrote:
> root@minobo:~# apt-rdepends -r systemd | wc -l
> 6598
It's not as bad as you think: the important package is systemd-sysv.
In buster:
$ apt-cache rdepends systemd-sysv
In bullseye:
systemd-sysv
Reverse Depends:
system
Am Sa., 9. Nov. 2019 um 23:01 Uhr schrieb Mike Gabriel
:
> [...]
> Isn't as side-question that is on the table with this GR: what about
> the future of non-Linux variants of Debian. If systemd becomes _the_
> init system of focus in Debian (by vote, not only de facto), kFreeBSD
> and Hurd will cert
On 11/9/19 11:24 PM, Simon Richter wrote:
> Yes, that would be my desired outcome: an affirmation that Debian wants to
> be "universal". This has been our greatest strength for years.
Its a strength that wasted an enormous amount of ressources. See
kfreebsd (which was actually really nice!) a
Hi,
On Sun, Nov 10, 2019 at 12:19:24AM +0100, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> > Yes, that would be my desired outcome: an affirmation that Debian wants to
> > be "universal". This has been our greatest strength for years.
> Its a strength that wasted an enormous amount of ressources. See
> kfreebsd (whi
On Fri, Nov 08, 2019 at 06:46:53PM -0500, Sam Hartman wrote:
> I think you may be mishearing what I'm proposing for a timeline.
[...]
thanks for clarifying, Sam, much appreciated.
--
cheers,
Holger
---
On Thu, Nov 07, 2019 at 01:04:20PM -0500, Sam Hartman wrote:
>
> This is a draft GR. I hope to be at a point where I could formally
> propose a GR in a week, assuming discussion converges that fast.
You can formally propose a GR today, and I recommend you do -- otherwise
we end up discussing thi
Hello all,
Sam Hartman [2019-11-07 13:04 -0500]:
> I hope my actions demonstrate that I've tried to work with and understand the
> needs of all sides here; that has been my intent.
Many thanks! (Again, in public now :-) )
Full disclosure: I discussed that with Sam in private before, as represent
Hello Wouter,
Wouter Verhelst [2019-11-09 10:32 +0200]:
> > Choice 1: Affirm Init Diversity
> >
> > Being able to run Debian systems with init systems other than systemd
> > continues to be something that the project values. With one
> > exception, the Debian Project affirms the current policy o
17 matches
Mail list logo
