Re: Challenge to you: Voice your concerns regarding systemd upstream
Hi Miles,
Am Freitag, 26. September 2014, 11:09:07 schrieb Miles Fidelman:
> Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> > Am Donnerstag, 25. September 2014, 01:45:50 schrieb lee:
> >> Martin Steigerwald <Martin@lichtvoll.de> writes:
> >>> Am Montag, 22. September 2014, 23:50:46 schrieb lee:
> >>>> Martin Steigerwald <Martin@lichtvoll.de> writes:
> >>>>
> >>>> Do you really think they will be able to prevent all the other
> >>>> software from depending on a particular init system or parts of it?
> >>>
> >>> Well… thats to be taken upstream, isn´t it?
> >>
> >> Then why don't the developers or the distributions do just that? Nobody
> >> cares when one user or another questions whether it's a good idea to
> >> depend on systemd, and it might be much different if a lot of developers
> >> and/or whole distributions would, in the interest of their users,
> >> question this dependency and refuse their support eventually until the
> >> issues systemd and software depending on it brings about.
> >
> > […]
> >
> >> Fedora does already depend on systemd --- and I would say completely.
> >> Or do you see a choice here?
> >
> > And exactly *how* is this relevant to Debian?
> >
> >>> And still I think its important to take this upstream.
> >>
> >> Upstream, from the users point of view, are the makers of the
> >> distribution in the first place. I can't very well make a bug report
> >> against systemd directly because Debian has decided to support it, can
> >> I. That's not a problem of systemd.
> >>
> >> To get involved with everything seems to have been a design decision of
> >> systemd. What do you expect will happen when I make a bug report
> >> directly against systemd, explaining them that it's broken by design?
> >>
> >> Or should I make a bug report against the X server because it depends on
> >> systemd? Or the other way round? Or perhaps against cups instead?
> >>
> >>> Or to *help*. Make a logind that does not depend on systemd. Offer it to
> >>> the upstreams that need it.
> >>
> >> I'm sure it would be ignored or rejected --- even if I had the knowledge
> >> to make anything like that and was able to keep up with what other ppl
> >> are doing.
> >
> > I do think that you don´t want change.
> >
> > You expect distro developers to fix it for you. You are not willing to
> > take
> > things upstream.
>
> So let's see:
> - the technical committee selects takes a vote that essentially imposes
> systemd on all of the upstream developers and packagers
> - systemd seems to have some rather frequently changing APS's - to the
> extent that systemd-shim lags well behind
> - but the resulting impacts should be taken up with each and every
> upstream developer?
>
> Somehow that doesn't sound right.
On any account:
If you think its better to bring this up with debian developers, by all means
do it.
If you think its better to do xyz instead of my suggestion, by all means do
it.
But my challenge to all of you who don´t want systemd as default in Debian
still is this:
*Stop* complaining and *start* acting.
For the reasons I explained in what I think crystal clear words that I do not
feel like repeating here again.
Ciao,
--
Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de
GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7
Reply to: