On 11/18/19 10:43 AM, Holger Levsen wrote: > On Sat, Nov 16, 2019 at 06:12:49PM +0000, Ian Jackson wrote: >> Holger Levsen writes ("Re: Proposal: General Resolution on Init Systems and >> systemd Facilities"): >>> On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 01:22:26PM -0700, Sean Whitton wrote: >>>> If we found that the six month delay was repeatedly expiring with no >>>> serious attempts at non-systemd implementations of the new features, we >>>> could repeal this GR. >>> I'm pondering an amendment to copy this option but without the 6 month >>> delay clause. >> In practice, we (in Debian as a whole) generally delay things for much >> longer than that, in order to give people a chance to catch up. > > I'd also say, because delays just happen, even though we have many > people updating software timely in unstable regularily, we also have > regularily delays. I don't think we should add more artifical delays. > > Also, your GR text is unclear when those 6 or 12 months start. > > And then, let's says systemd and gnome together develop a feature which > is then used by gnome, does that mean that also the gnome maintainers > cannot upload new versions of gnome? > >> If you just delete the bit about the delay, what will you replace it >> with ? If you say 0 delay then it amounts to standardising and >> recommending in policy a change which actually makes programs buggy as >> soon as you apply it. > > I'd replace: > > [...] The > transition should be smooth for all users. The non-systemd > community should be given at least 6 months, preferably at least 12 > months, to develop their implementation. (The same goes for any > future enhancements.) > > with > > [...] The > transition should be as smooth as possible for all users including > those of alternative init systems.
I agree with Holger that it's probably better to leave the amount of time undefined, and see what happens on a case by case basis. Cheers, Thomas Goirand