Am 23.10.2014 00:18, schrieb Martinx - ジェームズ: > I'm seeing that systemd is spreading itself everywhere, kind of creepy but, > well, I think that it is better to learn about it now, instead of fighting > it.
Note that in my eyes, you should differentiate between two different things: - mandatory dependencies on stuff developed in the systemd package (such as logind) - optional and harmless dependencies that enhance software when using systemd but don't hurt it otherwise (libsystemd0) If I put my developer hat on, it would be my goal to integrate it as best as possible with components used by different distributions. So, yes, I'd include optional systemd socket activation code if that makes sense for that software. An while I don't personally care that much about Upstart, if people expressed enough interest in it, I'd add code for socket activation there. And since socket activation is a runtime feature that is harmless if not used, I wouldn't make those dependencies optional, because they don't hurt anybody if the feature is not used. On the other hand, adding a mandatory dependency on something, especially if it requires some software to be running and not just installed, is something that I would have to consider much more carefully, because it reduces the amounts of environments my software runs in, and not increases it. My guess is that most if not all people developing software would agree with that sentiment. The flip side is that at some point, there might be some software that it so useful and without any realistic alternatives, that weighing the options I might come to the conclusion that I might not be willing to pay the price of not depending on it. And essentially, that's what the GNOME developers did when they decided to have a mandatory dependency on logind - they weighed the options and came to the conclusion that the cost of not requiring it was too high for them. You might disagree with their conclusion, because of a different set of values you espouse. But realize that the GNOME developers came to their conclusion honestly and without malice towards you or other people. (And as I said in another mail, I disagree with a lot of decisions of GNOME in regards to UX/UI, but I never thought that they had bad intentions.) At the same time, it would be nice for some people here on this list to recognize that the systemd developers also don't have bad intentions. Every part of the systemd package they developed tries to provide a useful building block for the operating system. Every piece of code they wrote either does something new, solving a problem that wasn't solved before, or does something old in a different way than before, in a way that the systemd developers would argue is better. You might disagree with the design decisions they made (I've done so in the past; recently I unsucessfully tried to argue with Lennart Poettering about the semantics of ProtectSystem= in units on the systemd ML), you might not like the way their project is organized, etc. But please keep in mind that all the components that systemd provides that people want to depend on (mainly logind) had no alternative before that made people happy. Take the case of logind: there was ConsoleKit before, it did mostly work, but I haven't seen many people very happy with it; a couple of years ago there were a lot of people that wanted something better, but nobody stepped up and actually made something better (or significantly improved ConsoleKit), until logind came. The main reason why systemd has become so successful and people are depending on parts of the project is that it has become very useful, and for the most useful parts often without a realistic alternative in sight. It doesn't mean people have to like the outcome of it all, it doesn't mean that critics are necessarily wrong, but they should recognize the reason for that outcome. Basically, if somebody wants to change the current situation, they have two options: either write better replacements for logind/etc. themselves (and if it's really better, projects like GNOME will probably support it) or convince other people to do so. If one is just a user and not a developer, they are typically left with the second option. Just please keep in mind that constantly clogging up mailing lists with innuendos, assumptions of bad faith on the part of other people, hatred and so forth is not going to help that cause. I'm not saying that people should never complain, but the amount of unproductiveness I've read on the Debian mailing lists in this regard in the last few months is just mind-boggling. To quote Russ Albery[1]: > I expect I'm not the only person who > finds the screaming and yelling decidedly unmotivating, and who has cut > back on Debian work as a partial reaction My guess is that if people stopped ranting so much about systemd and started helping those people who are actually working on stuff that makes software work without it (take the people working on systemd-shim in order to make logind work, who've probably not even remotely gotten enough credit by the people who are against systemd), Debian's support for non-systemd systems would already be in a much better shape. If you're not a developer, you can still help by testing configurations without systemd as PID1. Christian [1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2014/10/msg00402.html -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/544f646d.1010...@iwakd.de
