(Long time listener, first time caller - so apologies if I'm doing this wrong.)
Russ Allbery writes ("Bug#727708: init system other points, and conclusion"): >3.1. Ecosystem Reality Check ... > Therefore, I believe the burden of proof is on upstart to show that it is > a clearly superior init system along some axis, whether that be > functionality or portability or flexibility or maintainability, to warrant > going to the effort of disassembling a part of the systemd ecosystem and > swapping in our own component. I've been following this discussion pretty closely, but I don't think I've seen any substantive response to this point. Ian Jackson <ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> writes: > * upstart is simpler than systemd (which leads to fewer bugs, etc.) > * upstart integration fits better into a daemon source code > * upstart is easier to package for than systemd > * upstart's community is much better to work with > * upstart's remaining disadvantages are readily fixable SMOP > * upstart is therefore ready for adoption in jessie (non-upstart points removed) These all seem to be matters of opinion, contested by others on the list - and hence don't clearly demonstrate Upstart's superiority. Is there some significant Upstart advantage that I've missed? Cheers, Dave. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CALhO_qwn9AyGn=hfypc9sqkmnb_ac0_ucp1xksn0ve8ktqy...@mail.gmail.com