Hi there [and 1 more messages]

[Ian Jackson]

Martin Steigerwald writes ("Re: Hi there"):
> I think a first step would be to polulate
> 
> https://salsa.debian.org/debian/sysvinit

I agree.  Salsa is OK for this, although a bit slow.

> Of course regarding Debian I think having sysvinit maintained actively 
> again has some priority.

Yes.

Adam Borowski writes ("Re: Hi there"):
> Thus, I think there should be some kind of git workflow, be it
> free-for-anyone-even-remotely-approved (all DDs, you, etc) or a more
> classic open-PRs-taken-by-a-few-maintainers model.  In either case,
> there must be some staging ground that can hold the work in
> progress.

Salsa is good for that.

IMO we should use the now common patches-unapplied gbp-style tree,
with a debian/patches/ directory.  I didn't look at benh's tree but I
bet it is in that form.[1]

That's the form the Devuan elogind package was in.  (I'm afraid the
rather wip-ish branch that pm215 and I were working on is not - it's
in gdr format.  I can convert it back when we decide what to do about
elogind packaging.)

> As far as I know, there's no way to push a non-finalized package
> with dgit, right?

In this context, dgit is a tool for uploaading the results, not a
collaboration tool.  Obviously we should use it (and I will, if I am a
sponsor).  But we can do all the development in git.


[1] I would be tempted to suggest git-debrebase instead, but its
support for intensively parallel development by multiple people is
still very new and very rough.  Also our constituency of possible
contributors will already be familiar with the oddities of .dscs with
quilt patches etc.  So we should using existing tools that people are
likely to know from elsewhere.

> > 2) elogind is already working in Devuan ascii, and all the desktop
> > things seem to be fine with that.
> 
> This is the main part that you Devuan folks can help with!
> 
> I've been running your packages at home for several months, but never had
> the tuits to put that into Debian.  This will involve some serious work
> cooperating with systemd packaging, both wrt dependencies and switching
> from one to another (and remember, d-i always starts with systemd so every
> new install will need to switch from systemd!).

Perhaps surprisingly, I don't think this will be very controversial.
Once we get the appropriate pieces into Debian sid, we can file bugs
against rdepends asking for their Depends etc. to be updated.

> > 3) You might also have noticed that ascii has eudev working just fine.
> 
> It's great to have as backup, but I don't think eudev should be uploaded to
> Debian (except maybe into experimental?).  Current udev packages work well
> enough, and making them alternatives would be a lot of pointless effort.

FE.

> > 4) We are working to include as many init/supervisors choices at
> > install time as possible. Currently ASCII has also openrc, but the
> > idea is to add more options in Beowulf.
> 
> I'm not sure if diluting efforts is a good idea; I even haven't found any
> real uses for openrc that sysv-rc already doesn't adequately.

I think in the short term we need to fix the broken stuff.

In the medium to longer term we should definitely welcome effort on
different things, even if that is a bit dilute-y.

Regards,
Ian.

-- 
Ian Jackson <ijackson at chiark.greenend.org.uk>   These opinions are my own.

If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is
a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.