On Tue, 28 Jan 2014, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Don Armstrong writes ("Bug#727708: call for votes on default Linux init
> system for jessie"):
> > On Tue, 28 Jan 2014, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > > > M. Debian intends to support multiple init systems, for the
> > > > foreseeable future, and so long as their respective communities
> > > > and code remain healthy. Software outside of an init system's
> > > > implementation may not require a specific init system to be
> > > > pid 1, although degraded operation is tolerable.
> >
[...]
> Is there some rephrasing of this paragraph which would persuade you to
> put it ahead of a ballot option with the paragraph entirely deleted ?
Changing the last sentence to
Where feasible, software should interoperate with non-default init
systems; maintainers are encouraged to accept technically sound
patches to enable interoperation, even if it results in degraded
operation.
would be enough for me, but that basically makes the entire sentence
advisory, which probably doesn't satisfy your concerns.
--
Don Armstrong http://www.donarmstrong.com
You think to yourself, hey, it's a test tube, for God's sake. Pretty
soon, though, the rush from a test tube isn't enough. You want to
experiment more and more. Then before you know it, you're laying in
the corner of a lab somewhere with a Soxhlet apparatus in one hand,
a three neck flask in the other, strung out and begging for grant
money.
-- Tim Mitchell, 1994 Ig Nobel Chemistry Prize Speech
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
