Re: GR proposed re: choice of init systems
On Fri, 17 Oct 2014 10:20:16 -0700 (PDT)
Rusi Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> wrote:
> Seconds continue
>
> Bernhard R. Link
> Dimitri John Ledkov
> Arnaud Fontaine
> Thorsten Glaser
>
> And once again loud cheers for Ian Jackson and the seconds
>
> Some like Charles Plessy are distressed that this may be
> de-motivating, delaying etc.
Absolutely! By definition it's delaying, and I can't conceive of being
a systemd-agnostic developer or packager and not being de-motivated by
getting yanked this way and that. But ...
This reminds me of the old saying: "Marry in haste, repeat at leasure."
This was all forseeable when the CTTE voted, given their decision
logistics. It's too late to repeal the engagement, apparently it's even
too late for an annulment, but at least there can be an agreement to
see others during this loveless marriage.
Systemd as the one-and-only will doubtlessly produce a huge splintering
of Linux. Systemd as the preferred over other alternatives will
probably calm things down.
As for me, regardless of outcome, I'm going to continue finding and
making entanglement-free software. In fact, I should have started doing
this ten years ago, and in fact, I should have given much higher
priority to freedom from gratuitous dependencies of all types. I always
had a lousy feeling about network-manager: I should have created a
simple, low dependence alternative years ago. I've always had a lousy
feeling about dbus, and should have prioritized dbus-free software
years ago.
And from now on, when people laugh at my ugly, no-dependency, home grown
solutions as "kludges", I'll have exactly two words to say to them:
*Thank you*.
SteveT
Steve Litt * http://www.troubleshooters.com/
Troubleshooting Training * Human Performance
Reply to: