3 ms·

There seems to be an effort to rewrite history to "well, everyone adopted it, so it must be good, right?" That is very much not the way it happened. Go read the

by _jal 9y ago

There seems to be an effort to rewrite history to "well, everyone adopted it, so it must be good, right?" That is very much not the way it happened. Go read the discussions on the Debian lists, for instance - RHEL was indeed throwing its weight around. Add to that the games they're playing with interfaces, and at some point, it starts smelling like a miniature, farcical version of Microsoft in the 90s.

aseipp 9y ago
I don't even know what planet you're living on. In particular, Russ Allbery of the Debian technical committee gave some of the most detailed evaluation of systemd vs alternatives that I've seen from anyone from a user and maintainer POV. (He noticeably said, beforehand, he didn't think it would be a huge deal at first, but it turned out it was a big difference.) Many people did not like their decision, but suggesting that the Debian committee in particular didn't take the issue seriously and were strong-armed by Red Hat -- makes me think you have no idea what you're talking about, honestly. I'd like to read this part about RHEL throwing their weight around on the Debian lists. Given your implication is that Debian was clearly "forced" to adopting it, I imagine the relevant evidence shouldn't be hard to find. (Alternatively, you could actually ask other Debian maintainers yourself, like Josh, in this thread how it went. But you already did that and it didn't seem his narrative aligned with yours, so...)
- JdeBP 9y ago
  Everyone seems very focussed upon Debian in this thread, even though the thread started out discussing all distributions. It might be worth everyone's while remembering that Debian is not the be-all and end-all here, even though it did have a massive hoo-hah. The processes in other distributions were markedly different. * https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11834348 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11834348 * http://jdebp.eu./FGA/debian-systemd-packaging-hoo-hah.html http://jdebp.eu./FGA/debian-systemd-packaging-hoo-hah.html
  - pas 9y ago
    The first link doesn't seem to support redhat strongarming. Arch rc maintainer decided to drop rc for systemd. The linked evil-poettering intermezzo seems to be irrelevant and strawman-ish too.
bkor 9y ago
I participated in almost all of Debian discussions. I don't see how you can claim what you claim, at all. Care to explain? E.g. RHEL was throwing its weight around? The process at Debian started years later than any other distribution. It involved various votes, at least a year of discussion, etc. Then in 2017 someone ignores history and summarizes this into "RHEL was throwing its weight around"... ?!?
- atemerev 9y ago
  One question: did the ability (or easiness) to stay compatible with Gnome 3 influence the decision? How about the great udev scare? Also, we all remember that 4:4 vote, and all the drama later.

by _jal 9y ago

aseipp 9y ago

I don't even know what planet you're living on. In particular, Russ Allbery of the Debian technical committee gave some of the most detailed evaluation of systemd vs alternatives that I've seen from anyone from a user and maintainer POV. (He noticeably said, beforehand, he didn't think it would be a huge deal at first, but it turned out it was a big difference.) Many people did not like their decision, but suggesting that the Debian committee in particular didn't take the issue seriously and were strong-armed by Red Hat -- makes me think you have no idea what you're talking about, honestly. I'd like to read this part about RHEL throwing their weight around on the Debian lists. Given your implication is that Debian was clearly "forced" to adopting it, I imagine the relevant evidence shouldn't be hard to find. (Alternatively, you could actually ask other Debian maintainers yourself, like Josh, in this thread how it went. But you already did that and it didn't seem his narrative aligned with yours, so...)

JdeBP 9y ago
Everyone seems very focussed upon Debian in this thread, even though the thread started out discussing all distributions. It might be worth everyone's while remembering that Debian is not the be-all and end-all here, even though it did have a massive hoo-hah. The processes in other distributions were markedly different. * https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11834348 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11834348 * http://jdebp.eu./FGA/debian-systemd-packaging-hoo-hah.html http://jdebp.eu./FGA/debian-systemd-packaging-hoo-hah.html
- pas 9y ago
  The first link doesn't seem to support redhat strongarming. Arch rc maintainer decided to drop rc for systemd. The linked evil-poettering intermezzo seems to be irrelevant and strawman-ish too.

bkor 9y ago

I participated in almost all of Debian discussions. I don't see how you can claim what you claim, at all. Care to explain? E.g. RHEL was throwing its weight around? The process at Debian started years later than any other distribution. It involved various votes, at least a year of discussion, etc. Then in 2017 someone ignores history and summarizes this into "RHEL was throwing its weight around"... ?!?

atemerev 9y ago
One question: did the ability (or easiness) to stay compatible with Gnome 3 influence the decision? How about the great udev scare? Also, we all remember that 4:4 vote, and all the drama later.