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

Re: Is missing SysV-init support a bug?

On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 07:34:28PM +0200, Xen wrote:
> If that is the case then they have enbedded hostility into their name simply
> becaus eit offends normal grammar roles.

I don't that's it at all.

The reason many people react to the SystemD spelling is becuase, for
some years now, trolls use that spelling when harrassing others about

Calling it SystemD indicates to many people that you're the kind of
person show turns up from nowhere, and starts spreading fear,
uncertainty, and doubt about systemd, or presenting conspiracy
theories about it, or making ad hominem attacks on its authors. People
with bad experiences from previous systemd discussions will assume
you're that kind of troll, regardless of the value of any of your
claims or statements may have. Or at least I do.

We've had systemd related discussions for years. Just about every real
or imaginable problem with systemd has been raised. Even so, we chose
it as the default init in Debian, while keeping support for other
inits, and those railing against this are just not worth arguing with

Those who report actionable issues in systemd, or in our support for
other init systems, are welcome and should get all due attention. Bugs
are bugs and bugs should be squashed.

Everything in this mail is my personal opinion. It's possible other
members of the community working on Debian have different opinions.

I want to build worthwhile things that might last. --joeyh

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: