On Sun, 26 May 2013 15:23:44 +0800 Ben de Groot <yng...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On 26 May 2013 00:48, Michał Górny <mgo...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > On the other hand, we > > also agreed that they shouldn't refuse unit files if anyone else > > does the work for them. > > Where is this policy documented? Nowhere, I think. I've seen it coming in the late thread, looked common sense enough to me. If it is to be documented, I think we should document it in a more general fashion. To cover all stuff like completions, logrotate and so on. > >> [...] > >> And you misunderstood: it is systemd that is aggressively opposed to > >> Gentoo. But apparently that doesn't bother some of our developers and > >> Gentoo is becoming more and more welcoming to it. > > > > Protecting freedom through taking away the freedom of using systemd? > > Makes sense really. > > That would be similar to the way the GPL protects software freedom. > Does that not make sense to you either? No. The initial version of that response even used 'FSF' but I've decided not to flame it. > But it isn't even like that. I'm not taking away anyone's freedom to > use systemd. You can do so if you wish. You can add unit files to your > system by yourself, or use an overlay. There are various ways this > could be realized even within Gentoo. You know how fragile that is, don't you? > But you seem to dismiss all of those, and will only be happy by > forcing maintainers to add support to packages they maintain, even if > they believe it is a bad idea. Do I? As far as I'm concerned, I always kindly asked on IRC or opened bugs for it. -- Best regards, Michał Górny
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
