3 ms·
beefhash's explicitly stated rationale was reuniting the community. By attempting to derail this into yet another massive thread about the merits/demerits of s
by JdeBP 9y ago
beefhash's explicitly stated rationale was reuniting the community. By attempting to derail this into yet another massive thread about the merits/demerits of systemd, rather than a discussion of the desired future and already present capabilities of the Debian installer, and putting words into beefhash´s mouth that xe did not say as you have done here, you are instigating exactly the opposite.
* http://uselessd.darknedgy.net/ProSystemdAntiSystemd/ http://uselessd.darknedgy.net/ProSystemdAntiSystemd/
- ZenoArrow 9y ago>"you are instigating exactly the opposite" Not really. In order to 'reunite the community' you need to understand what that will take. Every init system that is supported adds an additional support burden onto the developers and maintainers that work on Debian. In order to minimise that work, it's important to understand the issues with the status quo. At one end of the spectrum, perhaps a few tweaks to systemd would be enough to satisfy most who had issues with it in the past. On the opposite end of the spectrum you have the distro needing to support 5+ init systems if there's little consensus about what a strong alternative to systemd would look like. The questions I asked previously are useful in understanding how much work would be required to 'reunite the community'. Feel free to answer them if you think this is a worthwhile line of inquiry.
- pwdisswordfish 9y ago> http://uselessd.darknedgy.net/ProSystemdAntiSystemd/ http://uselessd.darknedgy.net/ProSystemdAntiSystemd/ Dead link. Copy: http://archive.fo/5Gx8C http://archive.fo/5Gx8C