Steve Langasek writes ("Bug#727708: On diversity"):
> On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 01:17:13AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > I think (a) and (b) are pretty non-controversial. (c) and (d) are
> > required if we want to deal with new GNOME stuff and anything other
> > than systemd probably, and don't seem very hard to either do or
> > document. (e), (f) and (g) seem like a fairly straightforward of
> > allowing for multiple init systems in Debian. I think something like
> > (i) might be a good way of sunsetting tech ctte decisions so if
> > there's an actual consensus in future, there's no need to get a
> > pro-forma vote from the ctte to make changes in future. YMMV of
> > course.
>
> For my part I think this is generally a good idea, but I have the impression
> that at least Russ would be strongly opposed to this because it's too
> prescriptive. Probably not much sense in fleshing out such a reolution if
> there's not a consensus for it.
I lost track of all these (a)..(i). But I wouldn't say that it's not
worth fleshing something out just because there's a lack of consensus.
The final resolution is not going to be a consensus decision anyway.
Ian.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
