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

Re: Legitimate exercise of our constitutional decision-making processes

Tristan Van Berkom <tristan@upstairslabs.com> writes:
> On Wed, 2014-10-29 at 16:41 -0500, Nikolaus Rath wrote:
>> Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk> writes:
>> > In the battle between those upstreams and Debian contributors who want
>> > everyone to use systemd, and those developers and users who don't want
>> > to use systemd, _someone_ is going to experience duress.
>> I don't think that there are developers and users who want everyone to
>> use systemd (trolls excluded). There are just users and developers who
>> do not want to do the extra work that would be required to keep their
>> systems working without systemd, because that work should really be done
>> by the users and developers who don't want to use systemd.
> I think you've touched on the matter on which I have an opinion
> elegantly and directly right here. And I agree with what you say for the
> most part, except for the part where users and developers who do not
> want to use systemd should be going out of their way to implement
> alternatives for GNOME to run without systemd,

This is not at all what I said (or at least it's not what I meant). No
one is expected to implement any alternatives. What I am saying is: if
you do not want to use systemd, you have two options: also avoid any
software that depends on it, or implement an alternative that provides
the required systemd components. Asking *others* to implement such an
alternative is, as you put it, not what we've come to expect from FOSS


GPG encrypted emails preferred. Key id: 0xD113FCAC3C4E599F
Fingerprint: ED31 791B 2C5C 1613 AF38 8B8A D113 FCAC 3C4E 599F

             »Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a Banana.«

Reply to: