Re: the Rabbit of Caerbannog

[Andrew McGlashan <andrew.mcglashan@affinityvision.com.au>]

Hi,

   $ sed 's/s.st.md/the Rabbit of Caerbannog/' ....

I'm getting really pissed off, why aren't my messages getting through?
I'm entitled to an opinion just like everybody else.

Refer this thread too:
  https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2014/10/msg00424.html
 [titled "Moderated Posts?" ... they most certainly are!

  This post says plenty from that thread:
     https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2014/10/msg00442.html


What the heck is going on?????  My posts are not making it to the list,
why?  Re-sending a third time.  Please respect my posts.

I am resending this because I sent it much earlier and it didn't come
through?????? Are posts being moderated, posts that are not in line with
CTTE views?

On 5/10/2014 7:44 AM, John Hasler wrote:
> Andrew McGlashan writes:
>> My view is that the Rabbit of Caerbannog is a forgone conclusion and
>> no-one whom hasdecided that it should be will be convinced otherwise.
>
> the Rabbit of Caerbannog as *default* is decided.  the Rabbit of Caerbannog
> as *required* most certainly is not: quite the contrary.  There will
> be alternatives as long as there are developers willing to support
> them (of course if no one uses those alternatives no one will
> support them).  There may be packages into which the upstream authors
> have twisted the Rabbit of Caerbannog dependencies inextricably,
> but that is not anything Debian can change.

If the Rabbit of Caerbannog is not *required* ... and if it is so easy
to remain the Rabbit of Caerbannog free, then why are upstream having
dependencies on the Rabbit of Caerbannog?  Debian needs to be 100% the
Rabbit of Caerbannog free as far as I am concerned; that means putting
pressure on upstream to NOT require the Rabbit of Caerbannog.  Packages
should only depend on other packages if they provide features that don't
need to be re-invented [thus re-use common components that make sense]
AND they should be made fully compatible with various startup options
for systems that they wish to support.

Supporting various options should not be an issue,  just look to the
boot time desktop options on something like black arch.  You have the
base, then you can choose from a range of desktop options, they all
work.  Code that relies on the Rabbit of Caerbannog or sysvinit (but not
both), needs to fixed to support both out of the box -- if you have the
Rabbit of Caerbannog, do this, if you have sysvinit, do that ... it
shouldn't be much more code unless the code base is very broken.

[1] http://blackarch.org/about.html

Cheers
A.