On 19/11/17 15:10, Jaromil wrote:
> Following up after the conversation on redis, when we had the elected
> Debian leader chiming in here to defend his position and keep deleting
> init.d scripts, I still believe this is again "even worst than I
> thought" and it is "vandalism".
But Jaromil, as Chris Lamb pointed out that is not what happened:

Chris Lamb:
> I am the maintainer of Redis in Debian. All I have done is removed some
> ill-conceived hooks that were not used by anyone. I have not dropped
> sysvinit support and nor do I have any intention to do so. I only ask
> politely that you do stop to refering to my work as "vandalism".
To summarise.

1. the upstream redis distribution does not include an init script.
(There is an example init script in their git, but nothing in the
distributed tarball).

2. Debian wrote their own init script.

3. At some point they added an undocumented feature to their init
script.  This feature does not exist in the upstream example init script.

4. Since the feature was buggy, and since it had never been documented,
Chris Lamb removed it.

5. Some people misread the commit message as saying that sysvinit
support was being dropped.  They didn't check whether that was the case
by looking at the publicly available package and source.

Is this the Devuan policy?  "Assume bad faith"?