Russ Allbery wrote: > Uoti Urpala <uoti.urp...@pp1.inet.fi> writes: > > Russ Allbery wrote: > >> Free software is a social activity. The past history of qmail should > >> be informative here (or, for that matter, both gcc and glibc, which had > >> to go through disruptive forks to sort out long-term issues). One of > >> the determiners of the long-term success of a free software project is > >> the social skills of the primary maintainers, regardless of their skill > >> as software designers. > > > Systemd does much better than its competitors as a social activity. > > Neither OpenRC nor Upstart (with its highly questionable form of > > contributor agreement) can match systemd. You shouldn't confuse the > > existence of a group of vocal naysayers as the lack of a thriving > > community. > > You've made your opinion quite clear. Message received.
I think there are enough ways to measure things objectively that it's more than just my personal opinion. > >> I'm on the side of wanting to support a variety of different choices in > >> the archive so that people can experiment and evaluate and choose what > >> works best for them. > > > I question the usefulness of this approach for init systems. > > No one is expecting you to help, so your statement that you don't think > this activity is useful is just noise. Would you expect anyone who thinks such activity is not useful to help with it? This would seem to lead to the absurd conclusion that expressing a negative view/evaluation of anything would always be just noise, regardless of technical arguments or anything else. I would consider the "metadiscussion" of what is an appropriate way to test/choose init systems to be meaningful. Even if it were not immediately relevant to practice, that wouldn't make it "just noise". > One of the features of free > software is that there is no need to concern onself with the (presumably > billions) of people who *don't* want to work on something. Only the > people who *do* want to work on something matter, provided that they > include the resources to do the minimum amount of work required to > coordinate this sort of flexibility. This would be more applicable if I had been telling you exactly how you should go about adding support for init systems other than systemd. But I didn't. > > I think there's already enough evidence to show that systemd is clearly > > the best choice. How much more would you expect to have before it would > > not be "premature" any more? > > I don't see any need to have a firm answer to that question at this time. > The point is less about the amount of evidence required and much more > about the fact that there's no reason to make this decision unless and > until we actually need to as a project. We're not at that point. There's no need for Debian to make a formal decision that will be set in stone no matter what. But what you said was that it would be premature to pick winners and losers for init systems. I don't consider it premature to pick systemd as a winner; there's a difference between keeping your options open and claiming that they're all still equal. You don't need to make a _final_ decision yet. But that does not mean it would be premature to say that it seems pretty clear what the decision should be. > At this point, the single most annoying thing about systemd is the people > who are advocating it on debian-devel at every opportunity and seem > incapable of shutting up about it for more than a week, even though the > repeated conversations are both useless to the project as a whole and > don't vary with repetition. This thread was started by an "anti-systemd" poster, not "people advocating it". I don't see any justification for you to focus your blame on systemd *supporters*. Since you wrote this in a reply to me, I assume you meant that "people advocating it" to apply to me at least to some degree. The primary reason I wrote my original reply is that you made a misleading comparison between qmail (lack of working community) and systemd (working community, outsiders who complain). I can't see how you could claim that you're not significantly more guilty yourself of "useless posting" (or whatever your exact complaint is) than I am. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1354237847.1887.48.camel@glyph.nonexistent.invalid
