3 ms·

> LP's testimony starkly contrasts with Kay and SJR. No it doesn't. There is no reason that "conceptually, it was the wrong design" has to contradict with "the

by cwyers 11y ago

> LP's testimony starkly contrasts with Kay and SJR. No it doesn't. There is no reason that "conceptually, it was the wrong design" has to contradict with "they had different ideas to me, and couldn't contribute them because of the CLA" and "it could have quite easily evolved into what systemd looks like today, with an active community working on it." It is quite easy to read those statements as being in agreement -- Lennart decided that Upstart wasn't conceptually correct, SJR is amenable to discussing merging changes that would bring Upstart in line with Lennart's ideas, but the CLA is a roadblock so Lennart goes off to form his own project. Why not adopt the principle of charity and take everyone at their word?

vezzy-fnord 11y ago
Except for the whole part about Lennart's project already having a prior non-public existence. Discussing historical counterfactuals like this based on limited public testimony is a difficult matter, but my input here is that the ultimate breadth of changes envisioned by the systemd developers would have triggered a split anyway. SJR's comments concern systemd-the-PID1.
- cwyers 11y ago
  > Except for the whole part about Lennart's project already having a prior non-public existence. Is there any reason, any at all, that you've provided to think that Lennart wouldn't have abandoned that project to contribute to Upstart, if the CLA issue had been able to be overcome? Because the testimony of people who would actually know this indicates that he would have. I mean, I'm happy to drop this argument if you find it a "difficult matter," but it seemed to matter to you enough to bring it up in the first place, and you seem to be focusing on trivialities that you think support your point rather than some pretty unambiguous statements from people who would know (and it seems hard to accuse SJR of some sort of pro-Red Hat bias ehre).

by cwyers 11y ago

vezzy-fnord 11y ago

Except for the whole part about Lennart's project already having a prior non-public existence. Discussing historical counterfactuals like this based on limited public testimony is a difficult matter, but my input here is that the ultimate breadth of changes envisioned by the systemd developers would have triggered a split anyway. SJR's comments concern systemd-the-PID1.

cwyers 11y ago
> Except for the whole part about Lennart's project already having a prior non-public existence. Is there any reason, any at all, that you've provided to think that Lennart wouldn't have abandoned that project to contribute to Upstart, if the CLA issue had been able to be overcome? Because the testimony of people who would actually know this indicates that he would have. I mean, I'm happy to drop this argument if you find it a "difficult matter," but it seemed to matter to you enough to bring it up in the first place, and you seem to be focusing on trivialities that you think support your point rather than some pretty unambiguous statements from people who would know (and it seems hard to accuse SJR of some sort of pro-Red Hat bias ehre).