On 02/11/2014 02:41 AM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: > On 02/10/2014 06:47 PM, Clint Byrum wrote: >> It is pretty ridiculous to me to consider the basic plumbing on the >> system as replaceable as the thing that decides where on the screen my >> shortcut to Google search for "lolcatz" goes. > > I fully agree on that and other DDs already mentioned that in > the ITP for OpenRC as well. Most users won't actually be able to > tell what kind of init system they want, they just want a reliable, > fast and secure solution. That's what should be kept in mind when > making that decision. > > It's like being able to customize internal parts of your cars engine > when ordering one from your dealer. Customers don't care who the > manufacturer of your ignition system is as long it's the best > possible one. (Yes, I know comparisons with cars are bad ;)).
That's partly not truth. Some customers care, and do customization of their car. > Neglecting reliability and maintainability for the sake of being > able to choose such a core component is a bad idea. I do not > think it's really feasible to maintain several init systems, it > just affects too many components of the system. It's just up to the volunteers, which was my message. If some of us car, it's going to be possible. If there's not enough interest, then you are right. > We don't even manage to maintain two versions of ffmpeg (the original > and the fork) even though many users actually prefer the original. How > should this even work with the init system then? Maybe no DD cares enough for ffmpeg? On 02/11/2014 04:10 AM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: > Again, I do not understand how our users will actually profit from > being able to choose their init system. It doesn't mater, we don't force our thinking on you. Nor it's a good idea that you try to convince everyone that they should adopt *your* choice. I believe there's been enough discussion so that you will agree not everyone shares your view on systemd. I don't see it as a problem anymore. > Can you imagine this being an option in Debian Installer just like > you can configure your time zone or filesystems? What would you > write to the description texts of the different choices? Ubuntu users have a choice of installer: the Debian one and the standard Ubuntu one. I don't use the standard Ubuntu installer, though I have no pb with others using it. > It's crazy just to think about it. I don't see any craziness, it's just like all of Debian: volunteer based, and depending on everyone's motivation and involvement. > Do we allow users to choose their FireWire stack, WiFi or Audio Driver > stack in the kernel? There were several alternative implementations > of these, yet we only provide one of each. I don't see why we would explicitly forbid this choice (which has nothing to do with what we provide by default). Last time I checked, it was possible for our users to rebuild their own kernel. We even provide some userland tools for that. Thomas -- 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/52f9a514.6020...@debian.org
