On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 07:09:51PM -0800, Nikolaus Rath wrote: > Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes: > > On 2014-01-19 23:18:26 -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > >> As you say that planned features or development could sway your opinion: are > >> there particular features that you have in mind, here? For instance, > >> correcting upstart's socket-based activation interface is on the upstart > >> roadmap in the jessie timeframe. > > Showing some progress on issues like > > https://bugs.launchpad.net/upstart/+bug/447654 would excite me far > > much more than promises about future features. Not fixing issues > > described as "a fundamental design flaw" by upstart's original author > > for several years, without an inkling of progress, is what's causing > > doubts about upstarts health, at least for me. > I would add the very presence of the "mountall" tool to this > list. Lennart has described the issues with mountall in > https://plus.google.com/u/0/+LennartPoetteringTheOneAndOnly/posts/ip8e1DqJdxT, > and apparently the upstart developers have been aware them as well since > the very beginning (at least since Ubuntu 8.04) I will not respond to this except to say that I do not agree with Lennart's characterization of mountall as evidence that upstart's model is incorrect. If members of the TC feel this is worthy of further discussion, I will elaborate; but I suspect this isn't likely to be a major point of interest that would sway anyone in either direction, so won't spend the effort on it if there's no need. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ slangasek@ubuntu.com vorlon@debian.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature