|
|
Subscribe / Log in / New account

What am I missing here?

What am I missing here?

Posted Nov 30, 2014 22:36 UTC (Sun) by mgb (guest, #3226)
In reply to: What am I missing here? by HelloWorld
Parent article: The "Devuan" Debian fork

> Bullshit, Debian didn't introduce any such dependencies, upstreams did.

That is not actually true. Except for systemd itself, most upstreams are portable and very flexible. But a few DDs are reconfiguring packages to introduce systemd dependencies.

And the GR ruled that DDs can pretty much do whatever they want to Debian.

Hence the fork.


to post comments

What am I missing here?

Posted Dec 1, 2014 0:42 UTC (Mon) by ovitters (guest, #27950) [Link]

> And the GR ruled that DDs can pretty much do whatever they want to Debian.

No, the GR ruled that the existing development process is working well enough. Basically: it'll be worked out in bugreports and so on. If it really doesn't work out, there's still the CTTE. It's a pretty slow process (endless discussions) but eventually a decision is made. Seeing every little detail and discussing options at length is expected IMO. It's not something I'd enjoy participating in (I like endless discussions, but not if I am actually trying to achieve something :-P), but it does result in a very stable and well working distribution.

What am I missing here?

Posted Dec 1, 2014 8:12 UTC (Mon) by rahvin (guest, #16953) [Link] (2 responses)

One of the most important parts of the Debian constitution is that package maintainers cannot be forced to do work. You can't have a volunteer project where you require a maintainer to do some work they may not want to do, particularly when the problem originates upstream.

The entire Debian project would be destroyed by any requirement that went back on that basic premise from the constitution because you can't force volunteers to do work. The people complaining about this seem to miss this simple point.

It's no different that trying to pass a law in America that makes freedom of speech or religion no longer free. This would violate the basic premise of the USA constitution and there is a process for the courts to overrule it and declare such a law invalid and unenforceable. In Debian AFAIK there is no "supreme court" that ensures that resolutions comply with the Constitution. Fortunately the Debian maintainers voted overwhelmingly in favor of allowing the maintainers to do what they want just as the Constitution says.

Any resolution to the contrary likely would have unwound the entire Debian Project as maintainers began to quit after being forced to do work they did not want to do. It wouldn't take much or even very many people to quit to basically destroy the entire project. Regardless of how you feel about systemd there is no reason whatsoever to burn the entire Debian project down over it, unfortunately there are some that apparently disagree.

What am I missing here?

Posted Dec 1, 2014 9:03 UTC (Mon) by mgb (guest, #3226) [Link] (1 responses)

No one is asking DDs to work. Debian had a choice whether to prevent DDs breaking packages by introducing unnecessary dependencies on systemd.

Debian chose not to.

The debate is over. Now it is time to fork.

What am I missing here?

Posted Dec 1, 2014 9:48 UTC (Mon) by ovitters (guest, #27950) [Link]

That's really not what the GR was about, nor what was happening. Suggest to read the other explanations. You're suggesting someone people (DDs) are out to get you or something. A bit too much tin foil hat.


Copyright © 2025, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds