Re: GR: Selecting the default init system for Debian
On 19/01/14 03:25, Ben Hutchings wrote: In general, I've been quite unhappy with the excessive invocation of the TC recently, with developers seeming to view this as a first, rather than absolute last, resort. [...] Constitutionally, a GR is the last resort in that it can overrule every other decision. A GR can settle a decision finally but does *not* create consensus. So if you honestly think that more time should be allowed for a consensus to arise, perhaps you should propose a GR that says this issue is not ripe for the TC to decide on and sets some minimum delay before it can be brought to the TC again. It is not about the TC at all (unless they volunteer to do the work to implement any decision they make) Ultimately, whatever decision making process is used (GR, TC, etc) there needs to be some suggestion about who will actually do what and who presumably won't do anything or what will stop working E.g. if we choose systemd, who will implement all the things that need to be changed outside the Gnome related packages? What will immediately fail if not adapted to systemd? If we choose Upstart, it is not quite ready to do everything systemd would do and we have to trust the developers to follow through on their commitments to fill those gaps. I personally believe their intentions are good but promises are never the same as releases. If we decide to give them our trust and for any reason they can't deliver on time, what would we fall back on, is it enough to say we would just keep sysvinit for another 2 years, or would we defer the release and wait for them? Every option - and every fall back option - needs to be explained and accompanied by some details about who will do what if that option is chosen, if it hits a snag, etc. Only then do we have a list of choices for a GR -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/52db97ff.8070...@pocock.com.au
Re: GR: Selecting the default init system for Debian
]] Daniel Pocock E.g. if we choose systemd, who will implement all the things that need to be changed outside the Gnome related packages? What will immediately fail if not adapted to systemd? In general, nothing should fail. sysvinit scripts are first class citizens in the systemd world and you can have native → sysv → native dependencies. There are some bugs, both in systemd and in init script (such as cycles), but in general this hasn't been a big problem so far. I believe that the ease of maintenance and the ability to do more with native systemd units (private /tmp, network namespacing, etc) will make it interesting for maintainers to move towards native units by themselves, but there's no flag day involved for a switch-over. So, I'm not sure what you mean by «all the things that need to be changed outside the GNOME related packages». If you have any particular things in mind, please feel to enumerate them and I'll answer to the best of my ability. -- Tollef Fog Heen UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/877g9ws2q0@xoog.err.no
Re: GR: Selecting the default init system for Debian
Guillem Jover writes (GR: Selecting the default init system for Debian): I think that forcing a decision through the TC at this time was very premature and inappropriate, [...] Perhaps surprisingly, I am not entirely opposed to the idea of a GR for this question. My reasons are quite different to yours: to summarise, it seems to me that the init system decision involves political questions as well as technical ones. Points that have be raised which are essentially political include: * What kinds of attitudes are appropriate in an upstream ? For example, how much is it reasonable for an upstream for a project to require a specific init system ? * How much do we as a project care about the non-Linux ports ? * How much do we care about desktop vs. non-desktop users ? * How much effort are we collectively willing to put into dealing with things that upstreams do that we find troublesome (implicitly, at the cost of spending time on other things) ? * How scared are we of ending up the effective upstream for projects of various sizes ? [1] * If we are worried about being dictated to by upstreams, which upstreams are more scary ? * Many of the considerations in your message are matters of Debian internal politics. These are all IMO reasonable questions that one might ask. I do think that the proper process is for the TC to make a decision at this stage. The way I read the constitution and the context is that it is the TC's job. Evidently you disagree. But there are certainly things that some TC members are suggesting which would lead me myself to want to propose or sponsor a GR to overturn it. If we are going to have a GR, we need of course to have all of the sensible options on the ballot. I think your division of the key possibilities is sensible. However, I think your option (B) needs further reconsideration. I doubt the project will have the appetite for two GRs on this topic. Most people are heartily sick of the subject already, probably. (Indeed I'm somewhat worried that people might want to punish the proposers and sponsors of a GR for prolonging such a tiresome dispute.) Thanks for your attention, Ian. [1] I don't mention the upstart CLA here because pretty much everyone agrees that the upstart CLA is ridiculous. The question is whether it is in fact a problem for us, which is a mixed technical and political question. It boils down to this: how difficult would it be to maintain it as a fork rather than a downstream (a technical question), and how likely it is that we will in practice end up with a patch stack which can't be resolved with upstream changes (a political question). -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/21211.48961.532515.291...@chiark.greenend.org.uk
Re: GR: Selecting the default init system for Debian
I was going to write something longer about this, and I may still depending on whether I feel like I have a useful way to present the thoughts that are mingling in my head. But I wanted to at least briefly support Ian's point about a GR possibly being a more appropriate decision-making process if the decision hinges on political rather than technical grounds. I don't want to pass the buck, and there's a lot to be said for a small group of people doing a deep dive into an issue. But if this is more of a political question than a technical evaluation, the TC is in a very awkward place (unelected, basically self-selected, etc.) to be making political decisions for the project. Ian Jackson ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk writes: I do think that the proper process is for the TC to make a decision at this stage. The way I read the constitution and the context is that it is the TC's job. Evidently you disagree. But there are certainly things that some TC members are suggesting which would lead me myself to want to propose or sponsor a GR to overturn it. As a TC member, I dislike the supermajority requirement for the project to overturn a TC decision by GR, particularly in this case. I think we would all be extremely unhappy if the TC voted one way on the default init system and the project then voted a different way by a 60% majority. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87r4842mel@windlord.stanford.edu
Re: Debian Enhancement Proposals website temporarly broken.
Le Fri, Jan 03, 2014 at 02:54:51PM +0900, Charles Plessy a écrit : Le Thu, Dec 26, 2013 at 07:33:41PM +0100, Martin Zobel-Helas a écrit : assuming the content is entirely static, we could move dep.debian.net to dillon.debian.org. Would that be an option for you? I see that ikiwiki is installed on dillon.d.o and is used for dsa.d.o, but I am not sure if the same can be done for dep.d.n, because in our case we have the additional constraint that any Debian developer must be able to commit to the repository on alioth.d.o and trigger a rebuild of the wiki. Since gcc is not installed on dillon.d.o, ikiwiki wrappers can not be compiled, which rules out the use of the ikiwiki pingee plugin. Or would you install gcc ? The alternatives are to stay on Alioth (and install libimage-magick-perl), or host the ikiwiki somewhere else, or fall back to a simpler solution such as abandonning ikiwiki and using wiki.debian.org instead. Hi Martin and DSA team, do you think it would be possible to install libimage-magick-perl on Alioth or to help me to mirror a git or svn repository between Alioth and dillon.debian.org, or shall I move dep.debian.net on a third party infrastructure or a wiki.debian.org ? Have a nice Sunday, -- Charles Plessy Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20140119123337.gf32...@falafel.plessy.net
Re: GR: Selecting the default init system for Debian
Russ Allbery writes (Re: GR: Selecting the default init system for Debian): Ian Jackson ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk writes: I do think that the proper process is for the TC to make a decision at this stage. The way I read the constitution and the context is that it is the TC's job. Evidently you disagree. But there are certainly things that some TC members are suggesting which would lead me myself to want to propose or sponsor a GR to overturn it. As a TC member, I dislike the supermajority requirement for the project to overturn a TC decision by GR, particularly in this case. I think we would all be extremely unhappy if the TC voted one way on the default init system and the project then voted a different way by a 60% majority. I agree. I think that would be quite bad. We could explicitly state in our TC resolution that the TC decision can be vacated by General Resolution on a simple majority. Ian. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/21211.51045.916717.913...@chiark.greenend.org.uk
Re: Debian Enhancement Proposals website temporarly broken.
On Sun, 19 Jan 2014, Charles Plessy wrote: Le Fri, Jan 03, 2014 at 02:54:51PM +0900, Charles Plessy a écrit : Le Thu, Dec 26, 2013 at 07:33:41PM +0100, Martin Zobel-Helas a écrit : assuming the content is entirely static, we could move dep.debian.net to dillon.debian.org. Would that be an option for you? I see that ikiwiki is installed on dillon.d.o and is used for dsa.d.o, but I am not sure if the same can be done for dep.d.n, because in our case we have the additional constraint that any Debian developer must be able to commit to the repository on alioth.d.o and trigger a rebuild of the wiki. Since gcc is not installed on dillon.d.o, ikiwiki wrappers can not be compiled, which rules out the use of the ikiwiki pingee plugin. Or would you install gcc ? The alternatives are to stay on Alioth (and install libimage-magick-perl), or host the ikiwiki somewhere else, or fall back to a simpler solution such as abandonning ikiwiki and using wiki.debian.org instead. Hi Martin and DSA team, do you think it would be possible to install libimage-magick-perl on Alioth or to help me to mirror a git or svn repository between Alioth and dillon.debian.org, or shall I move dep.debian.net on a third party infrastructure or a wiki.debian.org ? Wiki.debian.org might be a good fit. If you want to move it onto static/dillon, we can also do that. Just state your preference. If you decide you like static: - we'll make an /srv/deb.d.n tree - can you provide a metapackage (snippet) and/or patch against http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=mirror/debian.org.git;a=blob;f=debian/control;h=8beb53a995e57e2cc9a719ec5f705b1a914a780d;hb=HEAD so we know the depdencies of the deb.debian.net build process. Just because something is already installed don't leave it out. Maybe you want to (partially) copy the -dsa.d.o one. - As for getting the data onto dillon, can't you just clone/checkout the git/svn tree there? Cheers, weasel -- | .''`. ** Debian ** Peter Palfrader | : :' : The universal http://www.palfrader.org/ | `. `' Operating System | `-http://www.debian.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20140119131150.gq13...@anguilla.noreply.org
Re: GR: Selecting the default init system for Debian
On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 12:04:17PM +, Ian Jackson wrote: My reasons are quite different to yours: to summarise, it seems to me that the init system decision involves political questions as well as technical ones. I would gladly vote an option that says: technically, we trust what the TC says; politically, we are concerned about some of our upstreams' choices. A technical endorsement need not also be a political one. I would like to keep the technical and political issues as distinct as possible, though. I am not interested in spending time evaluating each option to form a technical opinion on what the best choice would be, and I'm extremely happy that the TC are doing that for me. I do have personal opinions on some of the upstreams' choices, but I believe that they should not get in the way of a technical decision. A constructive thing that we may do as a project to address the political side of the matter, is to add to our technical decision a list of things that we wish our upstreams would do to make all our lives easier in the future. Ciao, Enrico -- GPG key: 4096R/E7AD5568 2009-05-08 Enrico Zini enr...@enricozini.org signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: GR: Selecting the default init system for Debian
Enrico Zini writes (Re: GR: Selecting the default init system for Debian): A constructive thing that we may do as a project to address the political side of the matter, is to add to our technical decision a list of things that we wish our upstreams would do to make all our lives easier in the future. The main objections to some of the upstreams' behaviours are, basically, they don't care what anyone else thinks, and are trying to impose their will by various means. If that's the case, further imprecations aren't likely to make any difference. So the main political questions for Debian are (a) is this the case ? (b) does it matter ? (c) what are we going to do about it ? Ian. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/21211.61095.334496.108...@chiark.greenend.org.uk
Re: GR: Selecting the default init system for Debian
Hi Guillem, I think you are missing the following options and have only listed options which you consider sensible or which you loath: h.) support them all equally: systemd, upstart, sysv and openrc and keep sysv as the default i.) support them all equally: systemd, upstart, sysv and openrc and make $foo1 the default j) support them all equally: systemd, upstart, sysv and openrc and make $foo2 the default k.) support them all equally: systemd, upstart, sysv and openrc and make $foo3 the default l.) accept the TC decision, whatever that will be m.) wait for the TC decision and then revote on this GR n.) wait for the TC decision and then start a new GR on this topic o.) my brain hurts, this is difficult, let's go shopping! p.) further discussion And, frankly, I'm disappointed by your *lousy* research on the topic (see both Tollefs and Steves reply), while at the same time I think you have given an *excellent* (bad) example, why voting is or can be bad: uninformed people vote on matters they dont fully understand. Given your lousy research I do assume you havent read the tech-ctte bug in question. If you had, I'm don't think you would think the same about the topic. (But then, most peoples minds aren't or cannot be changed by new information.) I do think this bug contains among of the best research of this topic. If you as a GR proposer cannot be bothered to inform yourself in the best possible way about it, I fear for a rather totally uninformed decision of other voters. cheers, Holger, who has come to the conclusion that this init system discussion is way more a bikeshed than what I would have assumed half a year ago. Indeed 99% of our users don't care and the majority of those who do care want their bikeshed their way or the highway... signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: GR: Selecting the default init system for Debian
Hi Holger, On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 04:53:12PM +0100, Holger Levsen wrote: o.) my brain hurts, this is difficult, let's go shopping! p.) further discussion p.) is rather I'd prefer fixing some bugs over voting and further discussion is q.) *excellent* (bad) example, why voting is or can be bad: uninformed people vote on matters they dont fully understand. +1 Holger, who has come to the conclusion that this init system discussion is way more a bikeshed than what I would have assumed half a year ago. Indeed 99% of our users don't care and the majority of those who do care want their bikeshed their way or the highway... While I agree in principle with all what you said before I think here is some distinction to bikesheding since the color of the bikeshed does not matter but the init system matters despite this attempt to put the decision on uninformed people (like me). But what I really wanted to say: Thanks for the nice MiniDebConf in Paris - it was a pleasure to be here. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20140119211255.gb13...@an3as.eu
Внешний вид и логика использования
Здравствуйте. Я не так давно начал пробовать использовать Гну/Линукс и Дебиан в частности. У меня появилось желание внести посильный вклад в развитие этих проектов. Я вольный дизайнер, мне интересны различные задачи графического и веб-дизайна, среди которых также и задачи внешнего вида и логики различных интерфейсов. Подскажите, пожалуйста, с кем я могу пообщаться, чтобы понять, насколько смогу быть полезен? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/52dcc172.7020...@andrej.by
