On 07/27/2016 01:57 PM, Simon Walter wrote:
On 07/27/2016 01:54 PM, Steve Litt wrote:
On Tue, 26 Jul 2016 19:10:00 -0700
Rick Moen <r...@linuxmafia.com> wrote:
Quoting Simon Walter (si...@gikaku.com):
On 07/27/2016 01:56 AM, Rick Moen wrote:
Quoting Go Linux (goli...@yahoo.com):
This is a must read on the politics and votes that ensured a
systemd future for debian:
http://forums.debian.net/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=120652
To my astonishment and pleasure, I found this well argued,
reasonable, and a good effort to cast light on a complicated
subject. Thanks.
Yes, thank you for this. It's the kind of thread I wanted to look
over.
There are places he plays a bit loose, but they're a very forgiveable
form of rhetorical excess. E.g.:
If someone characterizes systemd as an “init system,” you may
safely assume that s/he is either utterly clueless or deliberately
obfuscating the discussion.
Well, no. If someone characterises the thing as _only_ an init
system, that would be true.
I maintain that, for practical purposes, the preceding quote from dasein
is completely true and not at all loose or rhetorical excess. Let's
replace "init system" with "wheel" and "systemd" with "a car":
=================================================
If someone characterizes a car as a “wheel,” you may
safely assume that s/he is either utterly clueless or deliberately
obfuscating the discussion.
=================================================
True on the face of it. A person saying the whole is a mere part is
either stupid or up to no good.
But then there is the slang "wheels" jk...
I agree and really do not care to discuss systemd. I know what it is and
am aware of it's history and it's bugs and it modularity.
What I don't like is tight coupling.
What I wanted to know about was why *Debian* decided to use it as the
primary init program.
I have been given some good references.
In the above post, the author, 'dasein', mentions GR. Does this mean
General Resolution?
Further on in the thread 'dasein' says:
Sorry that was 'confuseling'. :/
"If we ignore the people who preferred the relatively neutral option 2,
we see from your own tally that 148 people preferred 'coupling is fine',
and 95 'coupling is unacceptable' - that seems to be about the most
direct way of measuring the size of the two poles to me, though
obviously it doesn't tell you whether they're voting on the principle of
maintainer autonomy, or on systemd specifically."
Does this mean that there was a vote? Do you call that a simple majority?
Simon
_______________________________________________
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
