On Mar 16, Lars Wirzenius <liw@liw.fi> wrote: > They have some technical and other differences, and have upstream > developers who can be considered controversial in various ways by > various people in Debian. How are the upstart developers controversial? Did I miss something? > it yet. (As a side note, if Canonical wants to stick with upstart, it'd > be in their interest to have Debian use it too, I think, and perhaps they > could do the Hurd and kFreeBSD porting?) A point which I find interesting is that Ubuntu, our most important derivative distribution, is committed to upstart so by adopting it we could benefit from synergies. > The usual way of that to happen is for someone to grab a keyboard and start > writing actual code, as opposed to e-mails. Do-ocracy ftw. We already have the code for Linux systems, we even have two different and competing implementations. The problem is the lack of code for the toy ports, and by now I think it is clear that nobody has plans to write it. -- ciao, Marco
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature