Sorry for yet-another-mail on that (long-lasting) bug, but I feel it's
important; so feel free to dismiss it if it isn't bringing to the
conversation.
Le jeudi, 6 février 2014, 16.27:15 Anthony Towns a écrit :
Rankings between remaning actual outcomes is:
4x UL DL UT DT (steve,
This is silly. It's pretty clear that everybody made up their minds a
long time ago, and no matter how the resolution is worded, it will come
down systemd upstart 5:4. The only question is on how to guide
maintainers once the init system is changed.
-Rick-
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
Hi,
On 02/06/2014 06:33, Russ Allbery wrote:
Don Armstrong d...@debian.org writes:
Would one more IRC meeting be useful to nail down the ballot options and
their drafts?
I personally suspect that we have exhausted the capacity of the TC to deal
with this problem, and that spending more
On Thu, Feb 06, 2014 at 10:20:02AM +0100, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote:
L really reads to me like a way to enforce support for all init systems
alike (thereby ensuring that the default init gets the same [bad]
support) on maintainers and I feel it's too coercitive.
I don't interpret L as
Colin Watson writes (Bug#727708: Both T and L are wrong, plea for something
simpler (was: Re: Call for votes on init system resolution)):
On Thu, Feb 06, 2014 at 10:20:02AM +0100, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote:
L really reads to me like a way to enforce support for all init systems
alike
Ansgar Burchardt writes (Re: Additional CTTE Drafting Meeting useful?):
In this case I suggest to decide just the question of the default init
system on Linux architectures first and address further details later if
no consensus can be found elsewhere. Finding the correct wording then
should
On Wed, Feb 05, 2014 at 10:43:25PM +, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
Colin Watson dixit:
Various developers certainly continue to work enthusiastically on their
preferred approaches, but that's not really the same as efforts to
resolve [the issue] via consensus.
But is not diversity some sort
On Thu, Feb 06, 2014 at 12:05:05PM +0100, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
On 02/06/2014 11:50, Colin Watson wrote:
I don't interpret L as meaning that everything must support all init
systems, certainly not alike (indeed the text of that option is
explicit that it isn't necessarily alike). Rather,
Russ Allbery writes (Bug#727708: Call for votes on init system resolution):
I think what we're trying to say looks something like this:
...
The result of that GR is A. However, the choice picked by the above
algorithm is B. So B becomes the TC decision, despite the fact that A is
the result
Ian Jackson writes (Bug#727708: Call for votes on init system resolution):
Steve Langasek writes (Bug#727708: Call for votes on init system
resolution):
I vote:
1. UL upstart default in jessie, requiring specific init NOT allowed
2. DL systemd default in jessie, requiring
Le jeudi, 6 février 2014, 10.50:05 Colin Watson a écrit :
On Thu, Feb 06, 2014 at 10:20:02AM +0100, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote:
L really reads to me like a way to enforce support for all init
systems alike (thereby ensuring that the default init gets the same
[bad] support) on maintainers
Josh Triplett writes (Bug#727708: call for votes on default Linux init system
for jessie):
That is a very interesting clarification, and not one that seems at all
obvious from the text of 'L'. 'L' talks about Software outside of an init
system's implementation, which does not seem like it
My first and last message to this list.
To Those Who Understand
---
Time ago, Linux was conceived as a Unix like OS. Thanks to internet it won
acceptance between hackers familiarized with Unix, guys that liked and valued
to have a Unix like OS at home. That first enthusiasm
Hi all,
As part of experimenting with a toy distro I wanted to get rid of
busybox's init, so I hacked together sinit[1]. sinit is based on Strake's
init[2].
It is currently controlled via a FIFO. It supports only two commands (reboot
and poweroff).
It follows the classic style of config.def.h
Didier 'OdyX' Raboud dixit:
Now, I think there is currently a shared agreement in Debian that
all Debian packages (unless there's a good reason) should run on
sysvinit + Linux + amd64 , support outside that is best-effort
Eh, no! Debian is the universal OS, and it has quite a number
of
On Wed, Feb 05, 2014 at 10:32:10PM +, Colin Watson wrote:
On Wed, Feb 05, 2014 at 04:33:57PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
I hereby call for votes on my previously proposed resolution and
amendments. All the options require a simple majority.
I vote:
In response to the uncertainty about
Colin Watson cjwat...@debian.org writes:
I think I signed my votes when I started on the TC, but then noticed
that nobody else was doing so and stopped bothering. I can go back to
signing them in future, though, since it sounds like it would make some
people more comfortable.
I just sign
On Wed, Feb 05, 2014 at 10:58:06PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
Kurt Roeckx writes (Bug#727708: Call for votes on init system resolution):
Please do not assume I have time to read everything. I don't. I
actually think I gave advice about this before which you seem to
have ignored.
I'm
On Thu, 06 Feb 2014, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
I think there are basicly 2 ways to go about this:
- You revoke your decision during the GR process so that when
the GR is being voted on your decision no longer applies and
the GR isn't trying to override the ctte. You could for
instance do this
On Thu, Feb 06, 2014 at 10:22:15AM -0800, Don Armstrong wrote:
On Thu, 06 Feb 2014, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
I think there are basicly 2 ways to go about this:
- You revoke your decision during the GR process so that when
the GR is being voted on your decision no longer applies and
the GR
On Thu, Feb 06, 2014 at 06:26:09PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
Kurt Roeckx writes (Bug#727708: Call for votes on init system resolution):
I think there are basicly 2 ways to go about this:
- You revoke your decision during the GR process so that when
the GR is being voted on your decision
Kurt Roeckx writes (Re: Bug#727708: Call for votes on init system resolution):
On Thu, Feb 06, 2014 at 06:26:09PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
If you agree with this reasoning then I'd be grateful if you'd advise
what form of words should be used to achieve the desired effect. The
desired
On Thu, Feb 06, 2014 at 06:53:56PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
Kurt Roeckx writes (Re: Bug#727708: Call for votes on init system
resolution):
On Thu, Feb 06, 2014 at 06:26:09PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
If you agree with this reasoning then I'd be grateful if you'd advise
what form of
On Thu, 06 Feb 2014, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
On Thu, Feb 06, 2014 at 10:22:15AM -0800, Don Armstrong wrote:
Either of these options will require 2:1, though.
Let me quote §4.1.4:
Together, the Developers may: [...] Make or override any decision
authorised by the powers of the
Kurt Roeckx writes (Re: Bug#727708: Call for votes on init system resolution):
On Thu, Feb 06, 2014 at 06:53:56PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
Yes. What did you think of my proposal earlier ? If you don't think
that has the right effect, please suggest something else.
Yes, I think that
On Thu, Feb 06, 2014 at 01:30:25PM +0100, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote:
Finally, I have hard time seeing under which powers could L be decided
by the tech-ctte: the policy team hasn't worked on that (§6.1.1), there
is no juridiction overlap that I could see (nor a disagreement about the
Don Armstrong writes (Bug#727708: Call for votes on init system resolution):
Given the already stated preferences of the CTTE, and the previous votes
we've already had, openrc and sysvinit are clearly not going to defeat
any option, so their position in your vote is largely irrelevant.
If we
Kurt Roeckx writes (Bug#727708: Both T and L are wrong, plea for something
simpler (was: Re: Call for votes on init system resolution)):
I'm currently of the opinion that gnome made an initial decisions
and as reaction to that they are setting policy and that this will
be allowed under 6.1.1.
On Thu, Feb 06, 2014 at 10:20:02AM +0100, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote:
...
Now, I think there is currently a shared agreement in Debian that
all Debian packages (unless there's a good reason) should run on
sysvinit + Linux + amd64 , support outside that is best-effort
sysvinit
On Fri, Feb 07, 2014 at 07:22:10AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
On 7 February 2014 06:20, Ian Jackson ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk wrote:
Don Armstrong writes (Bug#727708: Call for votes on init system
resolution):
Given the already stated preferences of the CTTE, and the previous votes
Adrian Bunk b...@stusta.de writes:
On Fri, Feb 07, 2014 at 07:22:10AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
Presuming everyone votes, where you put F only has an impact in either
case only if at least three other ctte members will also vote FD above
T or DT (given UT is irrelevant); which based on the
On Thu, Feb 06, 2014 at 02:20:51PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
...
This is one of the major reasons why I'm voting GR second. I see Bdale's
point that we shouldn't abdicate our responsibility to make the best
decision that we can, and I followed that maxim by voting my preference
first. But
On 7 February 2014 08:44, Adrian Bunk b...@stusta.de wrote:
If Colin joins Ian, Andreas and Steve in voting DT and UT below FD,
then T is dead.
It's really pretty terrible to actively use FD to try to block options
that aren't your favourite. Honestly, I would have expected the tech
ctte to be
Anthony Towns a...@erisian.com.au writes:
It's really pretty terrible to actively use FD to try to block options
that aren't your favourite. Honestly, I would have expected the tech
ctte to be able to come to a consensus on a set of proposals considered
reasonable by all the members, and
I'd like to request that upstart be chosen over systemd mainly because
there's already a large availability of deb packages that support init
mainly due to ubuntu. Ubuntu acts as a gateway distro to the debian
universe, and is a basis upon which numerous other distros are based as
well.
As such,
El Thu, 6 de Feb 2014 a las 7:41 PM, Schlacta, Christ
aarc...@aarcane.org escribió:
I'd like to request that upstart be chosen over systemd mainly
because there's already a large availability of deb packages that
support init mainly due to ubuntu. Ubuntu acts as a gateway distro
to the debian
Russ Allbery r...@debian.org writes:
Don Armstrong d...@debian.org writes:
On Thu, 06 Feb 2014, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
So let me expand on that a little. Image the following options
- A: something that doesn't overrule the ctte (1:1)
- B: something that does overrule the ctte (2:1)
- FD
In
Adrian Bunk b...@stusta.de writes:
Leaving tactical aspects aside, IMHO the important point is that there
is a compromise line that seems reasonable for all members of the TC:
For the upstart side of the TC, the most important question is T/L.
For the systemd side of the TC, the most
38 matches
Mail list logo
