Russ Allbery wrote: > Uoti Urpala <uoti.urp...@pp1.inet.fi> writes: > > > 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. > > If they haven't heard the evaluation, then it may be useful information > for them. Once you've already communicated the evaluation and established > that they don't agree with you, then yes, this is exactly true.
I'm pretty sure I haven't said anything similar about methods of comparing init systems before. Note that I did not say "it's not worth comparing because it's obvious that systemd would win anyway" (that's probably true, but it's something that _has_ been said before). I talked about the limitations of such an approach without reference to any particular systems being tested. > It's just like a vim user going on about how horrible Emacs is. No one > cares. The Emacs developers are going to keep developing on Emacs because I criticized a proposed method to compare vim and Emacs. Not vim or Emacs. > > 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. > > Yes, it's been obvious for months that you think there's enough data to > make a decision right now. But we're still not going to, and that isn't > going to change just because you've stated your opinion for the 51st time. Just to make it clear, I'm not arguing that Debian should make a formal decision right now. What I said was about technical evaluation, not formal decision-making. And here claiming that it's premature to make a technical evaluation is itself a claim about the situation, not a neutral position (saying that you haven't yet reached an evaluation yourself is a neutral position; saying that making an evaluation is premature is not). > > 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). > > You misread my message. I didn't compare qmail directly to systemd. I > was using qmail among others to make a general argument against the > position that social factors do not matter when choosing software. I think the message you replied to had little to do with a "position that social factors do not matter when choosing software", especially social factors relevant to maintaining a development community as your reply talked about. It was about the relevance of there being outsiders who complain. So maybe I read your message differently than how you intended it - but I think that was pretty natural if your intent was replying to something that hadn't actually been said. -- 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/1354246066.1887.107.camel@glyph.nonexistent.invalid
