| 1 |
On 08/24/2010 11:57 PM, Nathan Zachary wrote: |
| 2 |
> If we are going to endorse using OpenRC, |
| 3 |
> the more relevant issues are the ones regarding its future development. |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
Is the future development of OpenRC more problematic than the future |
| 6 |
development of baselayout-1? As far as I can tell, baselayout-1 never |
| 7 |
had an upstream, and never will have one. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
It seems like the debate is around openrc vs systemd or whatever. I |
| 10 |
think the debate we need to settle first is openrc vs baselayout-1. |
| 11 |
Otherwise we're going to end up maintaining TWO different legacy init.d |
| 12 |
systems while we spend the next few years aiming for yet another target. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
Wouldn't it make more sense to clean up openrc and get it deployed, even |
| 15 |
if in the long-term we decide to get rid of it? |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Alternatively, we drop support for openrc entirely, and tell everybody |
| 18 |
running ~arch to move to our next target or back to baselayout-1. I |
| 19 |
don't think we want to have three targets to maintain. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Rich |
Archives