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

Re: Can you all please stop?

Andrew McGlashan <andrew.mcglashan@affinityvision.com.au> writes:
> On 1/11/2014 4:20 AM, Russ Allbery wrote:

>> I find this "giving in" language mystifying.  Have you bought into this
>> idea that there's some sort of marketing campaign?  Because as near as
>> I can tell that's a conspiracy theory for which I see little support.
>> As one of the people who debated this originally on the TC, I can tell
>> you that I got precisely *zero* marketing, or even contact, from
>> systemd developers except where I explicitly reached out and asked
>> questions about things I was curious about.  I also have absolutely no
>> affiliation with any of these shadowy corporations that people think
>> are running some sort of long con on the free software community.

> Well if systemd was JUST an init system then it wouldn't be as
> significant, but it is much more than that today and endeavours to be
> much more again.

Happens to most software packages.  See Zawinski's Law (based on the old
MIT saying).  "Every program attempts to expand until it can read mail.
Those programs which cannot so expand are replaced by ones which can."
Emacs isn't *just* an editor either.  This is nothing new, exciting, or
different about systemd.

Just as you can only use Emacs as an editor and ignore all the other
stuff, you can also only use systemd as an init system and ignore all the
other stuff.  People are using the other stuff not because they're somehow
forced to, but because it's damn useful and interesting, and because the
people who are working on it are adopting really good ideas from (among
other places) Debian.

> I don't agree that systemd solves problems with sysvinit -- rather it
> tries to solve all other problems that sysvinit had nothing to do with.
> There's nothing hard or complicated about a well defined startup
> procedure via sysvinit, it's very standard and very easy to understand.

And I completely respect the fact that you believe this.  I just think
you're wrong.

> I don't see the need for upstart, systemd or any other /modern/ system
> to replace sysvinit.  I do see the need to fix areas of Linux usability
> OUTSIDE the init system, but not with systemd.

That's certainly fine, but you can't expect everyone to just agree with
you.  The rest of us have brains and thoughts and opinions too.  :)

Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org)               <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>

Reply to: