Debian 9.0 Reportedly Codenamed Zurg

[Skrapion]

So, will Zurg be used when they officially switch to systemd? I think it'd be somewhat inappropriate to transition Jessie to systemd. I feel the debian release cycles have been somewhat arbitrary.

Jesse will run systemd by default, but it's mostly just going to be running the old SysVInit scripts, in much the same way Upstart was used on RHEL 6. The whole CTTE agrees that they have to do it this way to enable smooth upgrades. It also means that you'll be able to run any init system on Jesse if you don't happen to like systemd.

When and how developers are allowed to drop SysVInit support is still being actively debated, and the CTTE is split between one faction that wants all software to support every init system forever, and another faction that doesn't want to get in the way of developers using advanced init system features.

[GreatEmerald]

Speaking of what Jessie is going to run, the TC is probably going to vote on Tv2/Lv2/NOOP tomorrow: https://lists.debian.org/debian-ctte.../msg00529.html
It will be quite exciting to see, since this vote is not a foregone conclusion and it's hard to tell who will vote in what order.

I also updated my case 2 with all Allbery's messages and with his cross-examination (probably will be starting a new case after this, it's now a bit too long for testing): http://aceattorney.sparklin.org/jeu.php?id_proces=57899

[schmidtbag]

Meaning what? Because they're not time based releases? Debian releases when its ready and the developers feel it meets their level of QA

I'm not a fan of time-based releases unless each release is simply just patches and bugfixes. A time-based release is not a good way to get out a reliable product. But whenever Debian switched to a new version, I didn't notice anything that called for a new release. I've used Debian since Lenny and the only changes I ever noticed between releases were newer, but still very outdated software. I understand Debian is supposed to be stable but "old != stable" in all cases. Even their testing repo is a little on the outdated side (though lately they seemed to step it up). I've had less update-caused failures in Arch while using newer packages, and Arch is a considerably smaller community. That being said, I'd really like to know what's going through the minds of Debian developers when they claim something is supposedly stable, and why they release things when they do. Until given those answers, I'd systemD is the perfect opportunity to release Zurg. systemD is a big deal for the distro as a whole - this isn't some incremental thing like a kernel update, this is a functionality change.

[GreatEmerald]

And here are the votes:

https://lists.debian.org/debian-ctte/2014/02/msg00575.html

Two are still missing, but from what I can tell, NOOP wins either way (at least via casting vote), if nobody changes their votes.

[Skrapion]

Yep, I'm seeing the same thing. A and FD are completely dead. If the last two votes are L>*, it's a tie between N and L, and Bdale's tiebreaker makes it N. Anything else and N wins outright.

[Skrapion]

Also interestingly, Russ voted N above his own proposal. If he had voted for his proposal, A would still be in the race for a tie. (Although, Bdale's N choice would still win.)

[GreatEmerald]

Also interestingly, Russ voted N above his own proposal. If he had voted for his proposal, A would still be in the race for a tie. (Although, Bdale's N choice would still win.)

Nah, Allbery already said that he would vote NOOP first as soon as Packard suggested it, but finalised A just so he'd have a solid second option and that if it won, he wouldn't be too disappointed.