retitle 754850 regression: no suspend/hibernate on non-systemd systems severity 754850 grave kthxbye
> > As upower 0.99 drops support for suspend and hibernate, relying on it to > > provide said support is futile. If you want to use 0.99, it must be > > provided by some other means, such as calling pm-utils directly. > > If the XFCE maintainer feels that only supporting suspend/hibernate > through logind interfaces, then it's up to *you* to work out an > alternative solution that suits *your* needs. There's no must involved > for the maintainer. It would be a wishlist issue if: 1. it was a request for new functionality, or 2. the issue was cosmetic What we have here is something that: 1. is a regression, and 2. makes the computer as a whole seriously less usable > Once you've provided a patch the maintainers should (note should, not > must!) consider your suggested solution Yes, at least one solution is simple: revert upower to the last functional version. There are other ways, like using pm-utils directly, but that would require actual work that, per your own words, we cannot force the maintainer to do. > -- to be in line with the > tech-cttes wishes to support multiple init systems when possible. Which clearly states that dropping support for other init systems must not be done without a good reason. Here, we have: * upower 0.9: works with systemd, sysvinit, openrc, upstart * upower 0.99: works with systemd only So it's a straight regression, without even giving any new functionality in return. > and since it seems every project > out there are now standardising on the logind D-Bus abstraction, with > different backends implementations, using another API is probably not > worth investing time in. If so, the burden lies solely in the upower land, and it's that package that has regressed here. > Now that we've cleared up the confusion here, I'm adjusting the title > and severity of this bug report accordingly as you can see above. I'm restoring the title to a reasonable value (as it's a regression rather than a wish). The severity was wrong (grave vs serious), but that's a pretty minor distinction. It's certainly not "wishlist". I do think, though, that this bug should be reassigned back to upower as it's not the fault of xfce4-session, but I'm leaving this up to the maintainer. Apologies for participating in a BTS ping pong, but as the severity has been changed by someone involved in Gnome3 rather than XFCE, I consider this action to have been anything but unbiased. The Gnome3 team is quite known for its zeal towards systemd, to the exclusion of any other init system. -- // If you believe in so-called "intellectual property", please immediately // cease using counterfeit alphabets. Instead, contact the nearest temple // of Amon, whose priests will provide you with scribal services for all // your writing needs, for Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory prices. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
