Re: Policy consensus on transition when removing initscripts.
On Sun, 25 Jun 2023 at 15:21, Mark Hindley <leepen@debian.org> wrote:
> "Init systems other than ``systemd`` should allow providing the same
> functionality as appropriate for each system, for example managing the
> directories from the init script shipped by the package."
>
> This creates an inconsistency whereby non-systemd inits are required to provide
> functionality in their initscript, but that initscript is not required to be
> present.
This wasn't intended as a hard rule, I used "should" and "for example"
to try and make that clear. That text has now been made more generic
after a suggestion:
-directories from the init script shipped by the package.
+directories from the appropriate service startup configuration.
which should hopefully clarify that nothing is required to be
implemented from scripts or packages themselves, but it is merely a
hint to developers and maintainers of alternatives that such
functionality should be supported in whichever way is most appropriate
for their systems.
Does this change help to clarify the intentions?
Kind regard,
Luca Boccassi
Reply to: