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

Re: Technical committee acting in gross violation of the Debian constitution



On 22.11.2014 02:13, Troy Benjegerdes wrote:

> Someone will find a hole in something, and there will be fire when sysadmins
> have to upgrade in the middle of the night and now are running systemd
> instead of what they are used to.

Well, in that case, I'd say a rain of fire isn't entirely what's going
to happen here ... would be more like a rain of transphasic torpedos ...

I think, the latest decision was really bad. Not because I personally
dont like Lennartware, but because we should leave people the choice.
At lot of people have lots of reasons why they never ever wont let
systemd on their machines, and would even switch whole datacenters
to Gentoo, LFS or BSD, before accepting systemd.

Most of the people I know personally (and that are quite a lot), many
of them traditional *nix operators, integrators, developers from
embedded to enterprise, people who're maintaining missing criticial
systems, large datacenters, etc, give a clear and absolute NO to
systemd. Can't tell how representative that is, but my gutts tell me
Debian will immediately loose 30..50% user base, if systemd becomes
mandatory (or even worse: silently injects it via an upgrade).

That would be desastreos, and directly lead into a fork (in fact,
the preparations for that are already on the way).

I think it would be very wise having a fundamental decision, that:

a) individual (usual) packages do _not_ depend on a specific init
   system (eg. making the systemd-specific stuff has to optional)
b) we will continue to provide the existing alternatives, including
   fresh installation (choosable at installation time, or separate
   installer images)
c) the init system will never be switched w/o _explicit_ order
   by the operator
d) this decision stands until explicitly revoked


cu
--
Enrico Weigelt,
metux IT consulting
+49-151-27565287


Reply to: