On Oct 31, Simon Richter <sjr@debian.org> wrote: > However, a lot of our software comes from the BSD world and will never > fully switch to systemd, and that software is often used in server contexts > by people who know exactly what they are doing. I don't see why we > shouldn't support these people anymore, especially as they are the ones who > cannot be served equally well by other distributions. Because by using systemd features in the Debian packaging we make better packages: simpler to maintain and more robust. (And then everything else that Ansgar patiently explained.) > The freedom to configure a system without things I do not want is one of > the main reasons that made me switch over from Windows to Debian, a bit > more than twenty years ago. http://www.islinuxaboutchoice.com/ > That is work we have to do regardless of whether we want to support > alternatives or not, but in the simple case we just list what is supported > by the systemd version we have decided to ship in the last stable release, > so we can have backport packages with reasonable effort. It is not obvious to me why we would need a different policy for systemd than for other packages which backports may depend on. > No, and that's not our job. There are a lot of people out there building > non-systemd systems. Data says: not really a lot. -- ciao, Marco
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature