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

Re: Challenge to you: Voice your concerns regarding systemd upstream



Martin Steigerwald <Martin@lichtvoll.de> writes:

> Am Sonntag, 28. September 2014, 04:35:03 schrieb lee:
>> Martin Read <zen75502@zen.co.uk> writes:
>> > On 27/09/14 21:04, lee wrote:
>> >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=990177
>> > 
>> > Your complaint about the interface is reasonable. The systemd
>> > developers' decision to not change the interface in response to your
>> > complaint was also reasonable.
>> 
>> I never said it was totally unreasonable.  I'm saying it would probably
>> be easy to fix and that they simply don't want to.  If they wanted to,
>> they could and would.
>
> It is still *one* bug report tough.
>
> Yes, I know there are others, systemd developers closed as won´t fix.
>
> Yet, look around a bit: That is true for *any* bigger software project I have 
> seen so far. Lots of "won´t fix" bug in KDE´s bugzilla as well for example. And 
> I do not always agree with the decisions.

Yes, making bug reports about KDE is futile.  I haven't tried KDE in
quite a while, yet I'm sure they still haven't even fixed the scroll
bars.

> So acting for change, you may meet resistance. But that initially resistance 
> is just that… an initial response towards change. A even natural response. Yet 
> it does not mean that change is impossible. Quite the opposite is true.

I don't think it's natural that resistance against change comes up when
a bug is discovered and reported in some software.  If that would happen
with software I wrote, I'd be interested in fixing the bug.

> I have seen systemd upstream and also systemd debian developers acting on bugs 
> and fixing them.

Sure, sometimes bug are fixed.  How often does that happen?  At least
bugs reported about systemd get some attention.

> Yes, I was frustrated with some of the reactions of Michael Biebl for example, 
> closing bugs quickly without resolving them, but first I found my tone at that 
> time to be contributing to that outcome, and second after I pleaded to him in 
> one bug report not to close it immediately, he didn´t close it

So nowadays you have to fall on your knees and pray to the great
developer to not ignore a bug, and you even take that for natural?

> … and… we worked together on some other issues. He told me what about
> he needs and I gave it to him.

Of course I'm willing to help with fixing a bug I reported as much as I
can.  That is usually being ignored, with very few exceptions.

> It may also be true that systemd upstream won´t be willing to implement the 
> change you want to see. But if you choose to keep your power with yourself, 
> instead of giving it to others, you are still powerful, even in that case. An 
> there are other options to create change.

Power not being used is usually taken and used by others.

> I also still believe that if systemd developers did completely off the limits 
> think, they would quickly be forked. I also believe that if Linus messed up 
> horribly with Linux developers, someone would start a Linux kernel fork. So I 
> believe there is quite some peer review with systemd stuff and there is some 
> real agreeing to they way it implements thing.

Then why aren't the concerns of those who disagree not taken into account?

> Its still about choice in Debian. Jessie will support alternative init 
> systems. And you can help with that.

You believe in it, I don't.  We will see what happens.


-- 
Knowledge is volatile and fluid.  Software is power.


Reply to: