On 03/30/2014 08:02 PM, The Wanderer wrote: > If it's been decided to continue to require package maintainers to > provide traditional init scripts as well as systemd unit files - e.g. > for Debian's non-Linux ports - then that benefit would be lost.
This, also, has also been discussed. The consensus is that we shouldn't *force* anyone to provide / design anything but systemd support, however, everyone should also accept patches by those who care about non-linux ports or $alternative-init-system. > If it hasn't, then I think it's entirely foreseeable that package > maintainers will at some point stop providing traditional init scripts. They should absolutely *not* remove init scripts that are working. If someone does, I would advise to first politely ask him to revert the regression. And probably asking the TC to force the maintainer to do so if he refuses would be a good idea. Now, not providing an init script for a *new* package is something different. I would expect to soon see patches being sent to the BTS by non-linux port supporters, or people willing to use the package without systemd. Though what I wrote above is only what has been *discussed*, there was no formal decision of what must happen. I dislike this gray area. :( > At that point, unless a means of producing init scripts from unit files > (which, last I heard, had been judged impossible) has been found, the > amount of work required to continue to run sysvinit would be far more > than the terminology of "changing the default" implies. I don't agree. We currently, at this point, have 100% full support for sysv-rc LSB-header scripts. I don't see it going away that fast. > To be doing more than changing the default here is not necessarily a bad > thing, but we shouldn't be pretending that changing the default is all > that's happening We haven't set into the stones of the Debian Policy Manual what init system *must* be supported by packages. Obviously, systemd being the default, it must be supported, but probably, through sysv-rc script is a way to support it. Not supporting sysv-rc is of course a bug, but of which severity? Wishlist? Release critical? We've been fighting on which init system should be the default, but I think those questions are even more important, and I don't have an answer to them. > unless choosing something other than the default > really is - and, barring another project-wide decision, is expected to > indefinitely continue to be - as simple as installing one set of > packages rather than another. See above: I'm unsure Debian Developers have yet a clear view of what should / must be supported, and what's going to happen in this regard. At least, it's not clear to me. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/533830df.4010...@debian.org