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

Re: Can you all please stop?

Andrew McGlashan wrote:
Hash: SHA256

On 31/10/2014 4:20 PM, Russ Allbery wrote:
I believe that the core, beautiful, exciting thing that we do inside
Debian, and that any other excellent Linux distribution does, is exactly
accepting what upstream does.  Not accepting in the sense of passive
apathy, but in the sense of wholehearted embrace of upstream's ideas,
expertise, passion, and hard work, and finding a way to incorporate that
into our distribution.  Acceptance in the sense of reaching out with both
hands and taking hold of the gift we are given with a firm grasp and a
grateful heart.
Thanks for your response, it is very well considered and written.

The trouble is that the "hedgehogs" seem to be going for the /easy/
option of giving in to systemd, rather that thinking about what is
actually best in the interests for their works ... perhaps systemd is
the best for them because it is becoming the "tyranny of the default"
[1], the last paragraph is gold.  If that is the case though, it is
going to be hard to revert later -- best to more properly consider the
consequences as early as possible, rather than go the /easy/ way and
succumb to systemd.

Even more to the point - systemd does not represent all of upstream, just a very vocal part of upstream.

Where is the load cry from other upstream developers for systemd? If anything, what I've seen on developer lists for some of the server-side software that I depend on are a combination of:
- not paying attention at all
- overtly assuming that systemd, and its cohorts, will (continue) to support legacy init scripts
- grudging "oh, I guess we should write systemd init code"

Miles Fidelman

In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is.   .... Yogi Berra

Reply to: