Re: systemd-free alternatives are not off topic.
On 25/11/14 00:25, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
> On 11/24/2014 2:56 AM, Scott Ferguson wrote: <snip>
>>> Yes, and while the Linux community continues, Debian will lose a
>>> lot of dedicated users due to this decision. Possibly another
>>> fork, or possibly another distro. But Debian will lose users.
>>
>> 1. At best that's pure speculation. With all due respect to Gypsy
>> Rose Lee (who is really just a naughty boy), some of us "engineer
>> types" place little stock in soothsaying.
>>
>
> It is more than speculation. Read the posts here - some people
> (including me) are already looking for alternatives. And so are many
> companies I know of who have looked at jessie.
1. Like most things, that's relative. In this instance to the number of
readers and "users":-
https://lwn.net/Articles/620441/
and, see my comments further down about "churn" (if I was overly tired
and emotional I might write "they're your ball, you know where your home
is?", "empty promises", and, "what's second prize?". But I'm not 'that'
tired and emotional).
2. Fore-telling the future, especially when the basis for future
extrapolation is *not* based on *any* (supplied and confirm-able) facts
- is assumption (not presumption - which generally, pre-supposes 'some'
evidence, of which you provide none (which doesn't preclude the
possibility you will at a later stage).
"Presumption" is distinct from "assumptions". (not to imply you are
cognitively impaired, just in awareness that this is not a 1:1
communication)
3. "companies" that you 'know '"have looked at Jessie" (which is not yet
a Stable release) is like "secret attorneys" - not demonstrable facts
and of dubious relevance. An unintentional oversight on your part I
'suspect'.
I may be alone in the desire to not start jumping at shadows (or hanging
monkeys in sailor suits) - that 'may' (based on historical precedence)
only lead to burning witches and people that don't look like the tribal
patriarch.
>
>> 2. It's false logic to conclude *only* losses from change (and
>> duplicitous to deny that systemd is your only choice) - it
>> overlooks the possibility that the additional *choice* of systemd
>> will attract more users (and more instances - you do know that
>> many "administrators" manage large numbers of instances, right?).
>> There is no evidence to show that other distros and projects that
>> adopted systemd as the *only* choice lost users - quite the
>> reverse.
>>
>
> These are the ones who are abandoning Debian.
Citation? "These" is a, um, little vague.
> Some of them came to Debian because it was one of the last holdouts.
Is that a reference to a term used in a television show about the
fictitious "Wild West"? I can only apologise of my ignorance of "popular
culture" (long story - I haven't watched "television" in several decades
- did I miss something important?).
Never-the-less I suspect what you refer[*1] to is what is called
"churn". Tyre-kickers, testers, those that don't want to/don't have the
time/capacity to learn sufficient skills, those that lack the
motivation/capacity to decide for them selves and "go with the flow" (of
the noisiest) - as some might say - like dead fish. None of which would
be clients of your "business" - though admittedly I'm guessing at your
business model and mean no undue disrespect to you as a Veteran Unix
Administrator. (it's late, I'm tired, please forgive any clumsy wording
and a total lack of editorial review, be assured I've endeavoured to
extend the same courtesy).
> But they see the way Debian is going also, and don't like it.
Objection - remains supposition *until* you supply evidence. I don't
doubt you don't "like it" (shades of Fffacefriend and primary
school??)But... there are many things I don't like, *I*'ll spare you,
and other readers further expansion on them.
> They'll probably end up on BSD.
Not necessarily a bad thing. BSD (a generic for a diversity of
distributions, can use love - providing that those disenfranchised
refugees that you refer to:-
;exist
;provide love
>
>>>
>>> Sure, people who only run software in .deb packages won't be hit
>>> as hard.
>>
>> At all. And then only if *they* don't elect to stay with sysv.
>>
>> But that is definitely not the entire Debian user base.
>>
>
> I never said it was the entire Debian user base.
Nor did I say you did. Please don't put words in my mouth.
> But even staying with sysv is only a temporary situation.
In your "prediction" of *future* events. Which is dependant on "Debian"
ceasing to do what Debian has done for more than two decades - overcome
difficulties and adapt to change (an instructive guide to coping, and
profiting from change, don't you think?)
> They see the handwriting on the wall
Daniel[*2] or Omar Khayyám? [confused, but still keen to learn]
> - whether you agree with it or not.
For the record - 'I' don't. On the basis of I've seen no evidence, in
spite of extensive research and carefully open-minded view, of any
factual support for the proof of soothsaying or prophecy (I was
disappointed to discover that Uri Geller was a fraud, but I digress). In
light of "assume the best intentions" I invite you to provide evidence
to the contrary. Please.
>
>> Those that deploy customisations in the "Debian Way" should file
>> bug reports if those customisations are not supported *if* they
>> change init systems. Upgrades have *always* supported
>> customisations done the "Debian Way" - and I have every confidence
>> they will continue to do so
>>
>
> And exactly what is the "Debian way" to add custom (NOT customized
> pre-packaged) software to the system?
Please, 'try' and extend the same level of consideration and respect
that others extend to you. I don't consider you a moron, or a "Linux
newbie" (and that's not a politically correct statement, it's based on
previous experience, appreciation of your past contributions to Debian
User, and various PHP forums). In light of which I endeavour not to
insult your intelligence (or threaten your pride) - the general
consensus is rather than hijack a thread:-
; search debian.org (read the documentation, look at the wiki)
; search Debian User
; read the fine documentation
; when the above fails, after consulting the Debian Wiki and "how to ask
smart questions" guide, read the posting rules for this list, and post a
suitably Subject titled question instead of hijacking threads or
employing the Gish Gallop (or follow your own "tough love" advice?)
I have no doubt you are capable of the above, though I recognise your
"situation" is not mine and may involve impediments I've failed to
adequately compensate for. My sincere apologies if that marginalises
your complaints (I can be a bit thick - at times, despite "best
intentions"). Even if I'm the only person who'd miss your positive
contributions to this list - I still be saddened by your departure.
>
> Jerry
>
>
Sincerely, kind regards
[*1] Desktop/Server wars? Linux - mainly Debian "won" the server war.
Why do (some USA-ians?) see FOSS as war?? Why are "numbers" so
important? Is it a self-validation thing? Is there an authoritative,
relevant, citation you can supply for Debian and this "numbers" (over
quality?) end-game? So many questions - so little time, and my poor
little head is so small.
[*2] No B.B., it's (just?) not football. :)
--
"The pure and simple truth is that the truth is rarely pure and never
simple"
Reply to: