On Sat, Feb 08, 2014 at 06:56:10PM -0500, Michael Gilbert wrote: > Why bring such a controversial and polarizing issue before the TC if > the outcome doesn't matter much to you?
OK, phrased badly. I don't care what it is, so long as it's not sysvinit :) I believe it to be broken, and not a future-proof solution, and I assumed that was sorta taken for granted that others agreed. The general consensus[0] is that sysvinit is not a solution going forward. > sysvinit is maintainable and stable, so why seek to change it? It's stable, but it's not going to be maintainable in the long-run, and I believe it will become unmaintainable very soon. > Paul, you know I think you're awesome, but you've stirred up a whole > lot of trouble here with a questionable motive. What motive is that, if I might ask?[1] :) We were already flaming pretty hard, it was out of control, it was in the best interest of everyone to get it resolved in a quick way. I believed (and still believe) the TC was the best way out of the situation, so I did the natrual thing. I care in so far as we are able to keep Debian maintainable and use software that allows future releases[2] to get sent to users without fuss. > Best wishes, > Mike Much love, Paul [0]: Yes, I know tg disagrees. [1]: Assuming ill intent are we? [2]: of Debian itself and new upstream releases (say, GNOME) -- .''`. Paul Tagliamonte <paul...@debian.org> | Proud Debian Developer : :' : 4096R / 8F04 9AD8 2C92 066C 7352 D28A 7B58 5B30 807C 2A87 `. `'` http://people.debian.org/~paultag `- http://people.debian.org/~paultag/conduct-statement.txt
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
