On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 09:57:50AM +0100, Nathael Pajani wrote: > You certainly heard about "debianfork" (http://debianfork.org/) and from a > user point of > view this is a tragedy. Don't worry, this is a joke.
> When a (big ?) pool of users is not happy to the point of suggesting to fork There is no evidence of this. > You'll notice that the fork has not been started yet, as (I think) many still > hope this > can end the right way, with USERS taken into account. All of them. I guess there is another reason it's not started. > Still from my point of view, this means that the user can choose between > alternatives for > almost everything when there is a choice. Let's cite a few to make it evident > : Vim/emacs, > KDE/Gnome/All/the/others/ones, Debian kernel/custom kernel, .... We don't support every custom kernel. We don't try to make every WM/DE have every option or support interoperability with all other software if it wasn't done by the upstream. > Then, when Debian developers are about to choose to impose a given init > system on it's > users instead of giving them the choice, I feel like it being a breach in > Debian's Social > contract and Ian Murdock's initial intention when he created Debian. You weren't given a choice of a libc either. > Yes, making an init-independent system is more work than the easy, "single > init" solution. > But I think there are people out there which will be willing to spend time on > this. There is no evidence of this. > But GNU/Linux is NOT uniformity. It is choice. It is alternatives. It is > options. http://islinuxaboutchoice.com/ -- WBR, wRAR -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141110093717.ga13...@belkar.wrar.name