On Fri, 3 Jun 2016 06:55:30 +0100
KatolaZ <katolaz@???> wrote:

> On Thu, Jun 02, 2016 at 05:57:27PM -0400, Steve Litt wrote:
>
> [cut]
>
> > >
> > > however this is all abstract speculation now. I'm not even sure
> > > we'll make such a big change in testing. most people and
> > > organizations switching to Devuan today (me included) are in need
> > > of a system that does not change their workflow arbitrarily.
> >
> > Yes. I would recommend against *any* init change in the foreseeable
> > future. All I'm saying is that *if and when* we change, the change
> > should be to something very different from sysvinit. Something like
> > Epoch, Runit, or s6.
> >
>
> IMHO, if and when we would like to make a change regarding init
> systems, that change should not be to replace sysvinit with an init
> system of *our* choice, but probably towards allowing users to use the
> non-invasive init of *their* choice.

Yes. The user should have an easy choice of inits. What I meant was
that SOME init must be default, and if that default init is ever not
sysvinit, it should be something very different from sysvinit.

SteveT

Steve Litt
May 2016 featured book: Rapid Learning for the 21st Century
http://www.troubleshooters.com/rl21