Voting Proposed For Debian Jessie's Init System

[Pajn]

As I understands it....
The external dbus protocol in logind was supposed to be usable in other implementations of the protocol. Logind was written as a implementation of this for systemd.
But Canonical instead ported logind to upstart. This is and was not supported by upstream systemd so the internal api between systemd and logind don't have any stability guaranties. Only the external interfaces have that.

According to the link jonnor provided earlier (http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Soft...tabilityChart/)
that isn't supported either (Reimplementable Independently is No).

[mrugiero]

According to the link jonnor provided earlier (http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Soft...tabilityChart/)
that isn't supported either (Reimplementable Independently is No).

I wonder what "independently" and "supported" means in the context, though. As I see it, "supported" means they'll make sure it is, but it was clearly doable, as not reimplementable implies not portable (think of porting as the minimal reimplementation you can do), and Canonical managed to port it to Upstart. "Independently" may as well mean that it can be a completely independent tool, not specifically not depending on systemd, but on any init system. So, it wasn't refuted that it can't be implemented independently by the fact it was ported to Upstart, but kind of reinforced: it wasn't made a stand-alone tool, but had to be ported to another init system.

[profoundWHALE]

What I like in that is

If you decide to reimplement one of the APIs for which "Reimplementable independently" is "no", then we won't stop you, but you are on your own.

...

Of course, one last thing I can't make myself not ask you before we finish here, and before you start reimplementing these APIs in your distribution: are you sure it's time well spent if you work on reimplementing all this code instead of just spending it on adopting systemd on your distro as well?

HEY CANONICAL, I THINK HE'S TALKING ABOUT YOU.

[Scimmia]

*Sigh*

Why can these threads never stay on topic? We've had a more than enough systemd vs upstart threads, how about talking about the voting? Things have gotten interesting with Ian Jackson, the leader of the upstart faction, voting 54231. That's right, he put systemd in last place specifically to block it, not for technical reasons. More info here: https://lists.debian.org/debian-ctte.../msg00441.html

[mrugiero]

*Sigh*

Why can these threads never stay on topic? We've had a more than enough systemd vs upstart threads, how about talking about the voting? Things have gotten interesting with Ian Jackson, the leader of the upstart faction, voting 54231. That's right, he put systemd in last place specifically to block it, not for technical reasons. More info here: https://lists.debian.org/debian-ctte.../msg00441.html

I'm personally against the strict "stay on topic" attitude. Usually, when off topics arise it is because the original thread has been exhausted, and this is specially true when we talk about articles. There isn't much to discuss about the facts. We have the mailing list to confirm or refute them, we know there's a voting going on, what would you actually discuss about it? You could discuss if it's right or wrong to vote on this things, but that would be an off topic on its own merit (as you would be talking something broader than the actual news).
On putting it in last place specifically to block it, that's probably true. But that it was based on no technical reasons, I wouldn't go that far. Maybe he really considers it's a project with a target too much broader than it should, and that could be considered a technical argument. Note that I'm mostly pro-systemd, but I'm pretty much against accusing people blindly.

[Scimmia]

Putting OpenRC over systemd is purely a political move. Not only that, his statement that I linked to is political.

As far as the "off topic" question, we have numerous threads about the systemd vs upstart debate, my point is that every thread even remotely related seems to rehash it again and again.

[Luke_Wolf]

I'm personally against the strict "stay on topic" attitude. Usually, when off topics arise it is because the original thread has been exhausted, and this is specially true when we talk about articles. There isn't much to discuss about the facts. We have the mailing list to confirm or refute them, we know there's a voting going on, what would you actually discuss about it? You could discuss if it's right or wrong to vote on this things, but that would be an off topic on its own merit (as you would be talking something broader than the actual news).
On putting it in last place specifically to block it, that's probably true. But that it was based on no technical reasons, I wouldn't go that far. Maybe he really considers it's a project with a target too much broader than it should, and that could be considered a technical argument. Note that I'm mostly pro-systemd, but I'm pretty much against accusing people blindly.

+1

Also thread derailment can result in some very interesting discussions, just... it has to be derailed by the right kinds of people... not people like "Truth", "Honton", or "BSDSUCKSDICKS"

[profoundWHALE]

I'm personally against the strict "stay on topic" attitude. Usually, when off topics arise it is because the original thread has been exhausted, and this is specially true when we talk about articles. There isn't much to discuss about the facts. We have the mailing list to confirm or refute them, we know there's a voting going on, what would you actually discuss about it? You could discuss if it's right or wrong to vote on this things, but that would be an off topic on its own merit (as you would be talking something broader than the actual news).
On putting it in last place specifically to block it, that's probably true. But that it was based on no technical reasons, I wouldn't go that far. Maybe he really considers it's a project with a target too much broader than it should, and that could be considered a technical argument. Note that I'm mostly pro-systemd, but I'm pretty much against accusing people blindly.

+1

I agree as well. Generally these threads don't exactly have a single topic to stick to.

"Discuss in the Forums"

This could be many things depending on the article or whatever.

[GreatEmerald]

Why can these threads never stay on topic? We've had a more than enough systemd vs upstart threads, how about talking about the voting? Things have gotten interesting with Ian Jackson, the leader of the upstart faction, voting 54231. That's right, he put systemd in last place specifically to block it, not for technical reasons. More info here: https://lists.debian.org/debian-ctte.../msg00441.html

Wow, Ian Jackson is acting really hostile. Not about his vote, but about the overall attitude, accusing Bdale of starting a vote without exhaustive discussion on what the vote text is supposed to be (time Debian most likely doesn't have, they need a decision and they need it fast). His proposed additions are minor, and yet he's calling a revote, and is also addressing people who have already voted to revoke their votes (instead of just asking if they want to revote under the slightly changed text, or just to continue voting noting that there are minor things not mentioned in the first post). I find his attitude to be really quite offensive.

As for his vote, yes, he explicitly stated he is voting for political reasons (but his intention, or at least pretext, is to stop the voting entirely). Also, he put upstart at the third, not first or second, place, which means that his vote won't impact systemd as much as it could.

[interested]

*Sigh*

Why can these threads never stay on topic? We've had a more than enough systemd vs upstart threads, how about talking about the voting? Things have gotten interesting with Ian Jackson, the leader of the upstart faction, voting 54231. That's right, he put systemd in last place specifically to block it, not for technical reasons. More info here: https://lists.debian.org/debian-ctte.../msg00441.html

That is tactical voting indeed. It is hard to believe that his ranking is sincere and that he thinks that sysvinit is better than even Upstart.

His tantrum and counter proposals suggest that he fears the battle for Upstart as default for Linux is lost, and that therefore forcing Debian to maintain multiple init systems may the be the wedge to mandate Debian maintainers to maintain Upstart scripts, even if systemd is default. It sure will be easier for Canonical to have the many DD's work for them.

As I understand the Debian voting rules, the CTTE memebers may change their vote later, and I predict he does when he sees what the other members vote.