Martin Read wrote:
On 26/09/14 16:09, Miles Fidelman wrote:
So let's see:
- the technical committee selects takes a vote that essentially imposes
systemd on all of the upstream developers and packagers
The technical committee has no authority (and limited soft power) with
respect to what *upstream* developers (i.e. the people who write the
software that Debian members then choose to package for inclusion in
Debian) do or don't do. It has bounded authority and power to decide
what work is expected to be done or not done in Debian, and thus over
what is provided *downstream* (i.e. to Debian's users).
And a sizeable chunk of the upstream work for *compatibility with
systemd* has already been done in response to events in Fedora, Arch,
OpenSUSE, etc. At this point, it seems to me that any upstream who
hasn't already done something to improve their software's
compatibility with systemd (if it even needs any work to achieve such
a thing) is more likely to say "bug reports only reproducible on
systemd are your problem, not mine" than "oh, well, if Debian has gone
with it as well maybe I'll have a look".
And the next step is to stop paying attention to old style init scripts.
--
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is. .... Yogi Berra
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/5425b60d.5080...@meetinghouse.net
