Hi,
Andrew McGlashan:
> The trouble is that the "hedgehogs" seem to be going for the /easy/
> option of giving in to systemd, rather that thinking about what is
> actually best in the interests for their works ... perhaps systemd is
> the best for them because it is becoming the "tyranny of the default"
> [1],
That article talks about default settings in software, particularly WRT
privacy. I don't think it's particularly relevant in this discussion, esp.
(a) this is about differing sets of features, (b) Upstream _has_ thought
about whether to support other init systems' interfaces (and decided
the time required to do that can be spent better elsewhere).
> going to be hard to revert later
(a) why should we want to do that?
(a1) if we ever do it, it's going to be an init with a comparable
feature set. there is none, not now anyway
(b) it's not, given the shims and/or config file translators we
already have
> rather than go the /easy/ way and succumb to systemd.
>
Do you really think that you can sway anybody's opinion here by comparing
systemd to an infectious disease?
And yes, it's easy. System administration and troubleshooting is _way_
easier with systemd than with anything else I've laid my hands on.
Sometimes, the "easy way" is a Good Thing.
--
-- Matthias Urlichs
--
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/20141031065915.gf3...@smurf.noris.de
