Russ Allbery wrote: >Thorsten Glaser <t...@debian.org> writes: > >> Yes, I fully agree. But _please_ also realise that there are people, >> a non-neglibile number of them, for whom these frameworks are not an >> improvement, and who wish to be not forced to use them. > >That's fine for you to feel that way, but that feeling does not obligate >anyone else to do work, nor does it obligate upstreams who see code and
I think it *does* morally obligate them to at least try. >conceptual simplification benefits for dropping non-logind approaches to >maintain support they don't like. If you want to be able to avoid new >frameworks that the general community of Linux developers feel materially AFAIHH (correct me if I'm wrong) the head Linux developer himself is not all that fond of the Poettering/Sievers duo. >My family had a Betamax VCR. The format was arguably much better than >VHS. It didn't get support, maintaining both formats wasn't viable, and >it died. We bought a VHS VCR. Yeah, my father complains about that too, a lot. But this is precisely why we're in an OSS movement here. We can change this, and we should, so that the other solutions do *not* die out. We should *not* accept the might of "the others all do this"! bye, //mirabilos -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/lojbns$eb9$1...@ger.gmane.org
