Hi, Aigars Mahinovs <aigar...@gmail.com> writes: > On 24 October 2014 12:35, Ansgar Burchardt <ans...@debian.org> wrote: >> In fact, they want to require that if P supports only A (and not A|B) >> that the maintainers of P have to patch P to make it support B. In the >> good old days[tm] it would be the responsibility of the people wanting >> to use B to submit patches to make P work with B (but here I suspect >> many people demanding support for B do not even use P[1]...). >> >> [1] In particular I heard somebody asked if anybody wanted to help >> with this work and from my understanding the response was not >> very enthusiastic... Why patch something you don't use after all? > > The root of the problem is coming from upstream not caring about > alternative init systems. To take the logind case as an example - each > of the dependencies from GDM to systemd make perfect sense in > isolation. However, the end result (was) that GDM only worked with > systemd almost by accident. No developer in that chain was compelled > to run this under other init systems.
Nobody stops people from submitting patches... But nobody seems to be willing to do so -- presumably because nobody using the software is interested enough to do so. > However these choices heavily impact our users who (for whatever > reasons) want or need to use another init system. Such users are used > to having to write an odd init script for some service - that is an > acceptable extra work for using a non-default init system. However it > is a much harder task to have to implement a new API introduced by > systemd or creating something like systemd-shim. We should not be > pushing such burdens to our users. But instead we should take away packages that depend on a features only provided by a specific init system (for whatever reason)? Do you think we serve users better by taking away options from them? So, if P has a hard dependency on systemd-as-pid1, why do you want to take P away from me? Because people not liking systemd are more important than people not caring about it or even being okay with it? I don't like some software too, but am sometimes required to use it without an alternative. Can I demand that I can use packages without said software? Like demanding libraries having to provide language bindings for at least two languages so I don't have to use PHP[1]? :) Ansgar [1] Please don't take offense for this example. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/877fzpn4ea....@deep-thought.43-1.org
