On Monday, 17 de November de 2014 20:45:19 Josselin Mouette escribió: > -- > .''`. Josselin Mouette > : :' : > `. `' > `- On Tuesday, 25 de November de 2014 17:30:38 Stephen Gran escribió: > Cheers, > -- > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > > | ,''`. Stephen Gran | > | : :' : sg...@debian.org | > | `. `' Debian user, admin, and developer | > | `- http://www.debian.org | > > -----------------------------------------------------------------
Why is it that systemd proponents are the ones using this kind of signature? Are they trying to insinuate that Debian is theirs? Transformig Debian in something different than Debian (the community-driven rock-solid Universal distribution we loved to put on our servers) may be allowed by being a majority of DDs, but it is not loving Debian. Systemd is a wonderful system. For laptops. Gnome is a great Desktop. For novel-users laptops. And Debian uses to be a great and wonderful distribution, for servers, desktops, laptops and embedded systems. And it is about to stop being wonderful for servers and embedded systems. This is not a defense of sysvinit. It is venerable, and that implies it is old. Not suitable for some modern tasks. But it happens that those modern tasks are not those needed on servers. I definitely do not want automount nor binary logs on a server. I want an independent time daemon on the server. I want static, trustable network configuration. I want the server not to stop booting if some disk goes wild. I want to be able to SSH into a headless machine as soon as possible, to debug its booting process if necessary. And all that is not the default in the next Debian release (with the exception of binary logs). And I'm not alone with all those "I want". So, forget the question about the signatures. It was just a teaser. Answer the real question. Forget about who our developers are. Who our users are?
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
