On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 01:32:35AM +, Dmitry Bogatov wrote:
> [ I read version of hartman1, which is based on my draft with s/must/should/]
>
> I do not think your option actually adds value, and not aware of
> somebody, who prefers your option to either Ian's or mine. On other
> hand our sys
[2019-11-21 13:58] Ian Jackson
> Sam Hartman writes ("Should I withdraw choice hartmans1?"):
> > By this point we have a group of people who have consistently seconded
> > options that promote init diversity.
> > That is, we have a group of people who have got
Sam Hartman writes ("Re: Should I withdraw choice hartmans1?"):
> Choice hartmans1 permits the use of non-startup systemd features.
> Under this choice, that's fine so long as the package continues to work
> with non-systemd systems.
>From hartmans1:
Similarly, pa
> "Ian" == Ian Jackson writes:
Ian> I think the most important difference between your proposal and
Ian> Dmitry's is that your proposal, as I say, (and I think unlike
Ian> Dmitry's):
Ian> legitimise[s] uncontrolled adoption of non-daemon-startup
Ian> systemd features
Sam Hartman writes ("Re: Should I withdraw choice hartmans1?"):
> I think two key differences between this choice and Dmitry's option are
> that:
>
> A) Init diversity issues are valid for an NMU but are never serious
>
> B) Dmitry's option puts specif
>>>>> "Ian" == Ian Jackson writes:
Ian> Sam Hartman writes ("Re: Should I withdraw choice hartmans1?"):
>> Would you like to propose a title you believe is more accurate?
Ian> It is difficult for me to do that without being tendentious
Sam Hartman writes ("Re: Should I withdraw choice hartmans1?"):
> Would you like to propose a title you believe is more accurate?
It is difficult for me to do that without being tendentious and
possibly offensive, since I don't like the proposal. What comes to my
mind
> "Ian" == Ian Jackson writes:
Ian> I think the title "Affirm Init Diversity" for hartmans1 is
Ian> rather misleading. hartmans1 seems to legitimise uncontrolled
Ian> adoption of non-daemon-startup systemd features; in this sense
Ian> it is weaker even than my compromise prop
Sam Hartman writes ("Should I withdraw choice hartmans1?"):
> By this point we have a group of people who have consistently seconded
> options that promote init diversity.
> That is, we have a group of people who have gotten behind specific
> options.
>
> I'd li
Hi Sam,
On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 07:44:02AM -0500, Sam Hartman wrote:
> I'd like to ask especially those people whether choice hartmans1 should
> be removed from the ballot. Within limits, I think more options is
> better, so my general preference would be to keep the option. However
> especiall
Hi.
By this point we have a group of people who have consistently seconded
options that promote init diversity.
That is, we have a group of people who have gotten behind specific
options.
I'd like to ask especially those people whether choice hartmans1 should
be removed from the ballot. Within
11 matches
Mail list logo
