I see that the resolutions I proposed on Sunday have been voted down (or are likely to be voted down). Without the wider scope of the GR separately rider (which looks unlikely to pass), my T-vs-L individual resolution is actively harmful because it's not GR-overrideable in itself so:
FORMAL ACTION: I hereby change my vote on "Init system coupling call for votes" to FD. I still want to vote on L. If we're not having a separate wide scope GR override, we need to add the GR rider to all relevant resolutions. FORMAL ACTION: I therefore hereby formally propose the following resolution ("init system coupling v2"), but do not yet call for votes. [rationale] The default init system decision is limited to selecting a default initsystem for jessie. We expect that Debian will continue to support multiple init systems for the foreseeable future; we continue to welcome contributions of support for all init systems. [rubric] Therefore, for jessie and later releases, we exercise our power to set technical policy (Constitution 6.1.1): [loose coupling] Software outside of an init system's implementation may not require a specific init system to be pid 1, although degraded operation is tolerable. Maintainers are encouraged to accept technically sound patches to enable improved interoperation with various init systems. [GR rider] If the project passes (before the release of jessie) by a General Resolution, a "position statement about issues of the day", on the subject of init systems, the views expressed in that position statement entirely replace the substance of this TC resolution; the TC hereby adopts any such position statement as its own decision. Such a position statement could, for example, use these words: The Project requests (as a position statement under s4.1.5 of the Constitution) that the TC reconsider, and requests that the TC would instead decide as follows: I intend to call for votes on this (with whatever amendments anyone chooses to propose) at 14:30 UTC on Friday (around 48h from now). IMO there has been plenty of time to try to develop a better wording. If no-one from the T side has proposed an amendment along the lines of T, then I will put the exact wording of the T as currently found in git on the ballot too. As might be expected, I am contemplating proposing and/or sponsoring a GR. Now that the default resolution has passed, a simple majority GR has the power to decide init system questions using the TC's powers. At the moment I think I will definitely do this if: * The vote on the proposal above results in FD. (I think it is important to make a decision on this quickly before "facts on the ground" are established to make this more difficult; the passage of the default resolution makes that urgent.) * Anyone in the TC Calls for Votes on a proposal I consider related to the coupling question without giving me an opportunity to propose an alternative text as an amendment. In this case I would propose a GR immediately. * Anyone in the TC Calls for Votes on any proposal related to init systems, without giving me an opportunity to propose an alternative text as an amendment, in a manner I consider prejudicial. If the TC's conclusion on the coupling question is IMO not sufficiently robust I will probably canvass opinions before deciding whether to propose a GR. Ian. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/21243.32848.338268.802...@chiark.greenend.org.uk