Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Debian Init System Coupling Vote Results

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Debian Init System Coupling Vote Results

    Phoronix: Debian Init System Coupling Vote Results

    The Debian technical committee voting surrounding a general resolution around init system coupling has ended...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTg0MzY

  • #2
    Originally posted by phoronix View Post
    Phoronix: Debian Init System Coupling Vote Results

    The Debian technical committee voting surrounding a general resolution around init system coupling has ended...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTg0MzY
    Now we will see if the threat of rearguard action will materialise...

    Comment


    • #3
      Debian progresses, slowly but steadily.

      Comment


      • #4
        After a few dramatic weeks of resignations and other worries, the vote about whether the Debian technical committee should issue a general resolution about preserving the freedom of choice for users to choose their own init system regardless of the Debian default.
        I see a subject in that clause, but no verb...

        Comment


        • #5
          lolwut

          This was not a Technical Committee vote. The Debian Project just had a general referendum with over 400 voters. Ian Jackson proposed the referendum to override the technical committee decision which was made months ago. He just lost, and by a lot.

          The winning option was an amendment that basically said "This is stupid and Ian Jackson is wasting our fucking time."

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by xeekei View Post
            Debian progresses, slowly but steadily.
            Debian moves at the speed of the US government, by the time they're done deciding what init system to use we'll be on SystemZ.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by You- View Post
              Now we will see if the threat of rearguard action will materialise...
              I never totally understood that thread but I think this whole affair WAS the rearguard battle. The original battle was System D* versus Upstart. Ian lost but he is not willing to accept total defeat. In his eyes total defeat is System D taking over Debian and exterminating all other init systems and therefore ruining Debian, and he believes that will happen if tight coupling with System D is allowed. So after he lost his primary objective of Upstart (and tight coupling of Upstart), he retreated toward the position of loose coupling. But others on the Committee were not satisfied with this and wanted tight coupling, so Ian fought a "rearguard action" (a battle you fight to defend yourself against a pursuing enemy while you are retreating) to stave them off. He lost that too when the Committee did not adopt loose coupling, so Ian fought another rearguard battle with the referendum. So he has been defeated in the original battle and also in his attempt to retreat to his Plan B position, so to complete the analogy we could say that Ian has now been not just defeated but annihilated.

              *As was discussed once before I am writing "System D" in the way in which proper nouns have been written in English for the last few hundred years, and not the way that the System D creators do it, because I think their way is stupid. Moving on!

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Chaz View Post
                *As was discussed once before I am writing "System D" in the way in which proper nouns have been written in English for the last few hundred years, and not the way that the System D creators do it, because I think their way is stupid. Moving on!
                A reminder below that the naming declaration related to daemon style is from UNIX world:
                Why? Because it's a system daemon, and under Unix/Linux those are in lower case, and get suffixed with a lower case d.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Chaz View Post
                  lolwut

                  This was not a Technical Committee vote. The Debian Project just had a general referendum with over 400 voters. Ian Jackson proposed the referendum to override the technical committee decision which was made months ago. He just lost, and by a lot.

                  The winning option was an amendment that basically said "This is stupid and Ian Jackson is wasting our fucking time."
                  LMAO
                  It's more evidence that the technically proficient overwhelmingly support SystemD

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by finalzone View Post
                    A reminder below that the naming declaration related to daemon style is from UNIX world:
                    It might be useful to use that convention in programming, to stand out or so people don't mess up capitalization or for whatever other reason, and I have no complaint about that. But when people write about it in English prose, and especially when they are talking about the project rather than the daemon itself, then I really wish people would use the capitals and the space. Capitals because it's a proper noun and the space (or maybe a dash) because we pronounce it with a space (don't we?) Heck, now that I think about it it seems like the name is actually either "System" or "System Daemon".

                    Also in case it's unclear I'm not trying to pick on the System D crew. I actually have tons of other pedantic beefs with the Unix and Linux world over spelling and capitalization. (Like, hey Richard, you can be Gnu or you can be GNU (pronounced "gee en yoo"), but not both! Sorry! And you want me to say "Gnu Slash Linux", are you effing kidding me?)
                    Last edited by Chaz; 11-18-2014, 11:09 PM.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X