Re: Technical committee acting in gross violation of the Debian constitution
"Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult" <enrico.weigelt@gr13.net> writes:
> Same for me. If there really is some functionality which some DEs really
> need, why not having an entirely separate tool for that ?
> Anyways, I still didn't understand why udev is bundled within systemd.
And I don't understand why you think your personal level of understanding
is interesting to the hundreds or thousands of people on this list.
Apparently, although you don't understand this, you don't care enough
about your lack of understanding to go do the mild amount of research
required to figure out why both of those decisions were made. It's not
like anyone's hiding the reasoning. Both decisions have been discussed
dozens of times over the past two years on this mailing list and many
other archived mailing lists around the Internet. You could also just
politely ask the people who made those decisions if you really can't find
the answer. (Being a polite person, I'm sure that you would understand
that an answer would be a favor to you, and wouldn't use that just as an
excuse to argue with people about their decisions.)
If you are curious and wanted to understand, there are many obvious
resources available for you to use. You might not *agree* with the
decisions or the reasoning behind them, but that's not the same thing as
not *understanding*.
Please, either go do the research required to answer your own question, or
don't, but stop telling all the rest of us about your lack of
understanding. At this point, this sort of message is essentially a
troll, since someone will see it, be unable to resist the urge to be
"helpful," try to explain the reasoning *yet again*, and off we'll go down
the same futile merry-go-round of argument.
Each time someone explains or asks for an explanation for the motivation
for systemd to them again, a kitten dies. Please, think of the kittens.
--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Reply to: