On Thu, Jan 02, 2014 at 02:05:35PM +0100, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
> Colin Watson writes:
> > On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 05:50:59PM -0800, Don Armstrong wrote:
> >> On Wed, 01 Jan 2014, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> >> > and I think it'd be a shame if we ended up losing or demotivating a
> >> > good bunch
On Thu, Jan 02, 2014 at 05:51:11PM +0100, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> In addition to the popcon numbers referenced from Sjoerd, we have the
> numbers from Michael's systemd survey in May 2013. The numbers there
> were 35%/30%/33% for yes/dunno/no for systemd as default init when only
> counting DD/DM
On Thu, 02 Jan 2014, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Ian Jackson writes:
>
> > And, despite the fact that the decision has become very politicised (to
> > some extent along the lines of preexisting camps of strongly disagreeing
> > contributors), I think it is primarily a technical decision.
>
> I think t
]] Colin Watson
> On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 05:50:59PM -0800, Don Armstrong wrote:
> > On Wed, 01 Jan 2014, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> > > and I think it'd be a shame if we ended up losing or demotivating a
> > > good bunch of good developers again.
> >
> > Pretty much every time the CTTE makes a ru
On Thu, Jan 02, 2014 at 02:39:15PM +0100, Sjoerd Simons wrote:
> While i don't have a good answer for your question, i did trigger me to
> have a look at popcon to see what that told me in terms of popularity of
> systemd vs. upstart. Unfortunately systemd can be pulled in quite easily
> via depend
Sjoerd Simons writes:
> While i don't have a good answer for your question, i did trigger me to
> have a look at popcon to see what that told me in terms of popularity of
> systemd vs. upstart.
Thank you!
Bdale
pgpPoSk59R79j.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Ian Jackson writes:
> Based on the responses to the recurring flamewars on debian-devel, I
> think the majority of contributors are happy not to have to wrestle
> with this decision and would prefer to leave it to us.
Agreed.
> Perhaps we
> should put (b) on the TC ballot for form's sake; I gue
Russ Allbery writes ("Bug#727708: CTTE and Developer Buy-in [Re: Bug#727708:
init system other points, and conclusion]"):
> Ian Jackson writes:
> > I don't think any of the TC are going to propose (b). Perhaps we
> > should put (b) on the TC ballot for form'
Ian Jackson writes:
> As the TC, I think we have two options for the process:
> (a) Make a decision based on our assessment of the merits; that
> includes considering the strength and health of the communites
> behind each project. But for me it doesn't include consideration
> of th
Ian Jackson writes:
> And, despite the fact that the decision has become very politicised (to
> some extent along the lines of preexisting camps of strongly disagreeing
> contributors), I think it is primarily a technical decision.
I think this is a remarkable statement given that you're the pri
Ansgar Burchardt writes:
> Sometimes I also wonder if a GR might be a better way to deal with the
> decision as this feels more and more like an "political" or "opinion"
> decision rather then a technical decision to me as tech-ctte members
> have found both upstart and systemd to be suitable so
Raphael Hertzog writes ("Re: CTTE and Developer Buy-in [Re: Bug#727708: init
system other points, and conclusion]"):
> I do. I know at least one person who expressed his intent to leave Debian
> if Debian wasn't able to make the choice of systemd. So if one is ready to
> r
On Thu, 2014-01-02 at 12:37 +, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 05:50:59PM -0800, Don Armstrong wrote:
> > On Wed, 01 Jan 2014, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> > > and I think it'd be a shame if we ended up losing or demotivating a
> > > good bunch of good developers again.
> >
> > Prett
On Thu, 02 Jan 2014, Ian Jackson wrote:
> And, despite the fact that the decision has become very politicised
> (to some extent along the lines of preexisting camps of strongly
> disagreeing contributors), I think it is primarily a technical
> decision.
The line of thought that you have been defen
Colin Watson writes ("Re: CTTE and Developer Buy-in [Re: Bug#727708: init
system other points, and conclusion]"):
> On Thu, Jan 02, 2014 at 01:09:27PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > Obviously that would be embarrassing for us and substantially damage
> > our credibility.
On Thu, Jan 02, 2014 at 01:09:27PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Colin Watson writes ("Re: CTTE and Developer Buy-in [Re: Bug#727708: init
> system other points, and conclusion]"):
> > Is there any useful way we could take a reasonably quick non-binding
> > straw poll of
Colin Watson writes:
> On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 05:50:59PM -0800, Don Armstrong wrote:
>> On Wed, 01 Jan 2014, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
>> > and I think it'd be a shame if we ended up losing or demotivating a
>> > good bunch of good developers again.
>>
>> Pretty much every time the CTTE makes a rul
Colin Watson writes ("Re: CTTE and Developer Buy-in [Re: Bug#727708: init
system other points, and conclusion]"):
> Is there any useful way we could take a reasonably quick non-binding
> straw poll of developers? Sort of an "if we voted a particular way, is
> it likely
On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 05:50:59PM -0800, Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Wed, 01 Jan 2014, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> > and I think it'd be a shame if we ended up losing or demotivating a
> > good bunch of good developers again.
>
> Pretty much every time the CTTE makes a ruling, someone is going to be
>
On Wed, 01 Jan 2014, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> Personally, I wish the TC was a bit more careful with the «people»
> angle of their rulings.
I'm personally very concerned about the developers whose decisions we
are overriding or mediating. But we probably don't convey this well
enough.
[...]
> and
20 matches
Mail list logo
