From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FB261381F3 for ; Sat, 10 Aug 2013 10:59:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id CB5E8E0B88; Sat, 10 Aug 2013 10:59:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ve0-f179.google.com (mail-ve0-f179.google.com [209.85.128.179]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0245CE0B6C for ; Sat, 10 Aug 2013 10:59:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ve0-f179.google.com with SMTP id c13so4567287vea.38 for ; Sat, 10 Aug 2013 03:59:00 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:content-type; bh=6IqKtgQzC/sQ+11h5s/6bImsgDtczSVvy/kHD5c8/fc=; b=MZActdrWAWIBOW60AVww/FOrPV8hdv34Tlt0WXmiAkHWtg10XXiTwun+NuhLhGiNG9 Yqia7WkwyBsuiJRmADhP6mKPiM9DcQe0RdVro3Kr3bOQMoPE3D/0OZtJlZzt86B1/Z/8 BaLaLzK3etDdmxBxMsmQLsgB4Te3fbdGbX/yvTqZDezpgkCxsK+f+iefLuhcebG1JdB5 4k2UojuQn1U42/pHjPYX6MBurYm2Rwazzjlw39ZbeGl89Y6gn8QBKzG2teQlUOtb6kIx vXl53e/01io5ZE/ooiRJL94SR/fpYhC1GavX8zzP8PeRHLkzhRPlYAKFaNDkef9d3kXH HPug== Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.52.24.111 with SMTP id t15mr6667346vdf.60.1376132340169; Sat, 10 Aug 2013 03:59:00 -0700 (PDT) Sender: freemanrich@gmail.com Received: by 10.52.73.74 with HTTP; Sat, 10 Aug 2013 03:59:00 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <52061B4C.7080106@gentoo.org> References: <5203A880.1050306@gentoo.org> <5203B190.80306@gentoo.org> <20130808172340.7d2424af@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> <5203C908.1000304@gentoo.org> <20130808185357.4208db83@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> <20130808202627.4b474471@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> <20130809020303.GA11215@linux1> <1376033807.30224.21.camel@kanae> <5204B6A9.1080309@gentoo.org> <5204D30A.703@gentoo.org> <20130809132622.70e67d5c@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> <5204D4DC.30108@gentoo.org> <20130809134525.51585175@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> <52061B4C.7080106@gentoo.org> Date: Sat, 10 Aug 2013 06:59:00 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: OP8yu7G6xPFPv7jPZhFZcqhSnbM Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Gnome Stabilization 3.6 or 3.8 From: Rich Freeman To: gentoo-dev Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Archives-Salt: 741d8355-799f-44cc-9584-3ef2c368d167 X-Archives-Hash: fdc93a447f7f8e8407693dff7ccd1add On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 6:51 AM, Patrick Lauer wrote: > not must, but if I choose to run the official supported configuration, > well, then telling me to go to an unsupported state is quite confusing > and sends the wrong signal. > There is no one official supported configuration of Gentoo. Nobody has to agree to make systemd an official supported configuration, because OpenRC isn't an official supported configuration either. At least, not in the way that the terms seems to be being used. There is no policy that requires packages to run when OpenRC is the service manager, and there is no policy that requires packages to supply an OpenRC init.d script. Now, I'm all in favor of a policy that would require maintainers to accept well-maintained patches to add such support to packages that lack it, just as I support this for systemd, or really for anything else. Well-maintained of course means timely, regression-free, no burdens beyond fetching and patching, and so on. Rich