Jonathan Dowland wrote: > Whilst I think you have honourable intentions in referring this to tech-ctte, > I can't help but think it's premature. > > The systemd maintainers have never said that they believe systemd is ready to > be the default init nor whether they could handle supporting it if the > decision was made out of their hands. > > They have proposed a release goal that is probably a necessary prerequisite > for default init but has not yet been achieved. (I wouldn't expect it to be, > yet. We aren't releasing for ages.) > > If asked what init system should be default *now* the only reasonable answer > is "stick" but that isn't a useful question.
I don't think the release goal of having native files for everything would be a prerequisite; I see no particular reason why it would not be OK to change default while some packages still use sysv compatibility. But it's true that actually changing to default is not a question for right now. However, I still think it would be appropriate to make a decision (and would have already been appropriate to do it earlier). The properties of the systems that the decision should be based on are not likely to change - the future init system should not be decided based on how polished the packaging is at the moment. In fact I'd consider it insane to fully polish everything to be ready for an actual switch, and only THEN make a decision whether to actually use the result or throw everything away. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1382735781.1856.94.camel@glyph.nonexistent.invalid