Ian Jackson writes ("Bug#727708: init system coupling etc."):
> Ian Jackson writes ("Bug#727708: init system coupling etc."):
> > In the spirit of my response to Noah Meyerhans:
> >
> > In general, software may not require a specific init system to be
> > pid 1. The exceptions to this are as follows:
> > * alternative init system implementations
> > * special-use packages such as managers for init systems
> > * cooperating groups of packages intended for use with specific init
> > systems
> > provided that these are not themselves required by other software
> > whose main purpose is not the operation of a specific init system.
> >
> > Degraded operation with some init systems is tolerable, so long as
> > the degradation is no worse than a tolerable bug. So the lack of
> > a particular init system does not excuse a bug nor reduce its
> > severity; but conversely, nor is a bug more serious simply because
> > it is an incompatibility of some software with some init
> > system(s).
> >
> > Is this a clearer line to draw ?
>
> I'd appreciate feedback from other TC members on this wording.
No-one has said anything. Indeed hardly anyone has said anything at
all.
I hereby formally propose the text above as an amendment to the
current resolution proposal.
Unless someone says that they prefer my old vague text to this new
one, I intend to accept that amendment before the Call for Votes.
I'm going to try to go through this thread and produce a draft Call
for Votes based on the proposals, amendments etc. which have been
emailed so far.
I intend to Call for Votes at 18:30 UTC tomorrow.
Ian.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
