[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: stop posting useless cruft and get to work (systemd and Linux are *fundamentally incompatible* -> and I can prove it)



On 26 March 2014 05:40, Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org> wrote:
[...]
> If you want thing to move on, stop posting useless messages, and start
> working on alternatives. For example, helping adding more features to
> OpenRC would certainly help a way more than this post.


I am going to have to respectfully disagree with you on my post being useless.

First off, let's realize that we have more than one problem here.

The actual implementation work that you indicate should be done is a
valid point.  We are both in agreement there.

However, there exists an even bigger problem to be tackled.

You can come up with all the solutions you want, but until it is
*widely understood* that your solutions are *needed*, people tend to
ignore and dismiss you.

You can clearly see that happening in the responses I got back in Nov 2012.

You first have to help people *understand* the problem.... and given
how all the other topics on systemd being a failure *still didn't
stop* debian's progress with using it.... I decided a very different
perspective needed to be introduced.

And I had to wait a while for things to get bad enough for people to
see some validity in what I am saying.

And while *you* might understand systemd is a problem, it is
*objectively evident* that most do not, given the recent momentum to
further adopt systemd by the linux community at large.

My post is an analysis of systemd from an engineer's point of view.
And systemd *violates* every engineering principle I spent years in
college to learn.

The biggest problem is awareness and that is the primary purpose of my
post.  And having it discussed in closed or private circles does not
help mass awareness.  It needs to be out in the open where everyone
can read it.

But it will have the most traction here.  Hence why debian-devel was
the primary target all along.

-Kev


Reply to: