Re: [draft] Draft text on Init Systems GR

Sam Hartman writes: > At this point, the question is whether the choices that need to be on > the ballot are represented in this draft GR. [...] > > version 2330c05afa4 [...] > Choice 1: Affirm Init Diversity > > Being able to run Debian systems with init sy

Re: [draft] Draft text on Init Systems GR

On 07/11/19 at 13:59 -0500, Sam Hartman wrote: > > Thanks for helping; resolving these sort of ambiguities are really > appreciated. > > > "Lucas" == Lucas Nussbaum writes: > > Lucas> Hi, > Lucas> On 07/11/19 at 13:04 -0500, Sam Hartman wrote: > >> Choice 2: systemd but we Suppo

Re: [draft] Draft text on Init Systems GR

Sam Hartman writes: > That sentence does not express a preference between init scripts and > service units: as you point out both work on systemd. > So I think we read the same so far. Note that we're currently discussing whether Policy will recommend (should) that any package with a service sh

Re: [draft] Draft text on Init Systems GR

Hi, On 07/11/19 at 13:04 -0500, Sam Hartman wrote: > Choice 2: systemd but we Support Exploring Alternatives > > > The Debian project recognizes that systemd service units are the > preferred configuration for describing how to start a daemon/service. > However, Debian remains an environment whe

Re: [draft] Draft text on Init Systems GR

Thanks for helping; resolving these sort of ambiguities are really appreciated. > "Lucas" == Lucas Nussbaum writes: Lucas> Hi, Lucas> On 07/11/19 at 13:04 -0500, Sam Hartman wrote: >> Choice 2: systemd but we Support Exploring Alternatives >> Packages should include service

[draft] Draft text on Init Systems GR

This is a draft GR. I hope to be at a point where I could formally propose a GR in a week, assuming discussion converges that fast. At this point, the question is whether the choices that need to be on the ballot are represented in this draft GR. I did not obtain a review of this version from s