Matthew writes: > * We've talked about the burden already; there are people willing and > able to help with this, and that offer remains good, be that by > providing patches, MRs, help with bug reports on non-systemd systems, > NMUs, or some other mechanism that Michael would prefer
I think that it is worth mentioning, in this context, the burden on the other side. That is, the burden Debian places on those who want to "explore alternatives to systemd", as the GR puts it. The non-systemd community has suffered many unexplained or poorly-explained deletions of working functionality, and several other kinds of blockages. Each time we need very careful escalation to the DPL and the TC etc. [1] This continual fight to not have working things deleted (or broken without good reason) is *much* more work than we are asking of the maintainers of core packages like network-manager. The opposition we face, and the consequential burden of constant emotional and political attrition is *the only real impediment* to having really good support for alternative init systems in Debian. It is also a drain on the energy of the people who would otherwise be developing and integrating alternatives to both systemd and sysvinit. Ian. -- Ian Jackson <ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> These opinions are my own. Pronouns: they/he. If I emailed you from @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.
