4 ms·

The problem I see with any complaints about Lennart's behavior is that his behavior is explicitly rewarded. No one is really "routing around the damage", unles

The problem I see with any complaints about Lennart's behavior is that his behavior is explicitly rewarded. No one is really "routing around the damage", unless they're taking the dysfunctional route of ignoring problems with the software. Lennart has been "crowned" with the position of being the de-facto leader of Linux init systems, since just about every distro that matters at all has adopted systemd. So unless the Linux community is going to adopt something different, or fork it and have some different leadership, I don't think they have much right to complain about Lennart's communication and leadership style. Don't put someone in a position of leadership and power and then whine that they're not doing things the way you want them to, unless you're prepared to back up your criticism with real action. The Linux community has apparently decided they're going to use Lennart's creation (and not fork it away from him), no matter what, so what's the use in complaining? People have been complaining about him for many, many years now, and he's obviously not going to change. This reminds me a lot of everyone complaining so much about Windows 10. If you're not prepared to vote with your feet, your complaints are just wasted breath (or keystrokes) when the vendor obviously doesn't care one iota about your grievances.

LinuxBender 9y ago
Out of curiosity, who put him in that position?
- gorkonsine 9y ago
  The distros, collectively. Red Hat employs him and pushes systemd, and all the other distros (except a few weirdos like Slackware) follow along happily. It's a lot like GNOME, except there's a few somewhat-mainstream distros out there that have non-Gnome DEs at least.
  - digi_owl 9y ago
    So do happily, some do begrudgingly because they do not have the manpower to opt for alternatives. I have taken to likening systemd the the lovecraftian shoggoth, because both are amorphic masses that changes shapes and sprout new "features" continually. This means that unless you have the deep economic pockets to rival Red Hat, you basically have to follow along. End result is that whatever comes out of Fedora sets the de-facto standard in the Linux ecosystem these days, for better or worse (imo, the latter).
    - gorkonsine 9y ago
      >So do happily, some do begrudgingly because they do not have the manpower to opt for alternatives. Perhaps, but is it really that hard to just stay with the older init services (sysv, upstart)? Slackware still has sysv AFAIK. Also, if they really wanted they could team up with other distros to share the workload. As for Gnome, this simply isn't true: Linux Mint proved this by hosting not one, but two renegade DEs: Cinnamon and MATE. And KDE and Xfce are still around, and not hard for distros to adopt if they choose; they just don't, they'd prefer to jump on the Gnome3 bandwagon for some odd reason. >This means that unless you have the deep economic pockets to rival Red Hat, you basically have to follow along. Again, Slackware seems to disprove this. Perhaps also Gentoo. Neither of these are large distros. >End result is that whatever comes out of Fedora sets the de-facto standard in the Linux ecosystem these days, for better or worse (imo, the latter). The existence of all the Debian-derived distros, using apt, seems to partially disprove this, but I get your point and I agree about it being worse. I really wish the Linux ecosystem had perhaps 3 or 4 large players, but each roughly equal to each other, instead of there being one commercial behemoth with too much power. Unfortunately, while Debian seems to be holding its own somewhat, SUSE went down the tubes ages ago and hasn't done any kind of power-wielding or standard-setting, and Ubuntu has tried and failed and is turning into just a Debian respin.

LinuxBender 9y ago

Out of curiosity, who put him in that position?

gorkonsine 9y ago
The distros, collectively. Red Hat employs him and pushes systemd, and all the other distros (except a few weirdos like Slackware) follow along happily. It's a lot like GNOME, except there's a few somewhat-mainstream distros out there that have non-Gnome DEs at least.
- digi_owl 9y ago
  So do happily, some do begrudgingly because they do not have the manpower to opt for alternatives. I have taken to likening systemd the the lovecraftian shoggoth, because both are amorphic masses that changes shapes and sprout new "features" continually. This means that unless you have the deep economic pockets to rival Red Hat, you basically have to follow along. End result is that whatever comes out of Fedora sets the de-facto standard in the Linux ecosystem these days, for better or worse (imo, the latter).
  - gorkonsine 9y ago
    >So do happily, some do begrudgingly because they do not have the manpower to opt for alternatives. Perhaps, but is it really that hard to just stay with the older init services (sysv, upstart)? Slackware still has sysv AFAIK. Also, if they really wanted they could team up with other distros to share the workload. As for Gnome, this simply isn't true: Linux Mint proved this by hosting not one, but two renegade DEs: Cinnamon and MATE. And KDE and Xfce are still around, and not hard for distros to adopt if they choose; they just don't, they'd prefer to jump on the Gnome3 bandwagon for some odd reason. >This means that unless you have the deep economic pockets to rival Red Hat, you basically have to follow along. Again, Slackware seems to disprove this. Perhaps also Gentoo. Neither of these are large distros. >End result is that whatever comes out of Fedora sets the de-facto standard in the Linux ecosystem these days, for better or worse (imo, the latter). The existence of all the Debian-derived distros, using apt, seems to partially disprove this, but I get your point and I agree about it being worse. I really wish the Linux ecosystem had perhaps 3 or 4 large players, but each roughly equal to each other, instead of there being one commercial behemoth with too much power. Unfortunately, while Debian seems to be holding its own somewhat, SUSE went down the tubes ages ago and hasn't done any kind of power-wielding or standard-setting, and Ubuntu has tried and failed and is turning into just a Debian respin.