On Mon, 24.03.14 21:22, Peter Robinson (pbrobin...@gmail.com) wrote:

> Interesting! You sent the email starting this thread a mere 4 days
> ago, two of those a weekend. You've not given it a chance to even go
> to FESCo meeting for discussion. Did you send it in the same way to
> the rest of the distros that depend, or are soon to depend on, systemd
> now.... SuSE, Arch, Debian, Ubuntu etc giving them no chance to
> discuss the impact before you unceremoniously tear a feature, for
> some, out?

I quickly got reports back from the other distros, and even reported it
back here...

I am not "tearing" the thing, I am just saying that I don't have the
time to work on it in the Fedora scale.

> systemd is now, or soon will be, a core component of pretty much all
> major and minor distributions out there and it's no longer just about
> you Lennart and your thoughts of whether it's "Yuck!" or not, you are
> now similar to the kernel and like the kernel you should have a proper
> deprecation process that is not just what you, Kay and who ever the
> main developers decide is cool or not at the time. You should give us
> and distributions in general more than 4 days to deal with what lives
> or not. Ultimately systemd is no longer in nappies and is all grown
> up, while you are still it's father it's now a teenager and needs to
> be somewhat independent of it's father, it has friends that now depend
> on it and there's should be a central place where these architectural
> changes and deprecation intentions are announced, discussed and in the
> case of deprecation given more than 4 days before removal.

We *did* get feedback from distros first, and we provide an alternative
to use tcpwrap with systemd even further on (via tcpd), so I really
don't see what you are upset about.

Lennart

-- 
Lennart Poettering, Red Hat
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct

Reply via email to