9 ms·

My god the comments in this thread are terrible. How can grown ass adults be so pathetically mean to a single person because he wrote (free & gratis!) software

by tpush 4y ago

My god the comments in this thread are terrible. How can grown ass adults be so pathetically mean to a single person because he wrote (free & gratis!) software they don't like. Seriously, it's mystifying.

corrral 4y ago
People dislike his work for various reasons but are still forced to use it thanks, in part, to his employer promoting it aggressively (it's not like he did all this for free). That's a recipe for saltiness. Kinda like Bill Gates back in the day (remember that "Kill Bill" game, and other similar ones?)
- esarbe 4y ago
  No one is forced to use it - you can always switch distro. I also use hyperbole as a rhetoric instrument but in text seldom works.
  - corrral 4y ago
    At work you may not have that choice, especially since all the most-used (so, best supported) distros are deep into systemd now, or if you have a distro that you otherwise like but that has switched to systemd. It's possible to prefer something over alternatives but still think it's worse than it used to be, or could be better, or to very much dislike one part of it. Again, much like Windows and other MS products. People effectively had to use them ("well technically they could quit their jobs instead, so they didn't really have to"—LOL), which sets up circumstances for some serious hate. To repeat what I've written elsewhere, no-one is upset with any other init system or audio daemon creators, even if they don't like the software. Something different happened with these projects.
    - JetSpiegel 4y ago
      > well technically they could quit their jobs instead, so they didn't really have to There are jobs which force you to use Linux, and SystemD in particular? Where do I sign up?
    - esarbe 4y ago
      > At work you may not have that choice, If you cannot switch the distro, then you deal with it. That's the tyranny of not using Linux-From-Scratch. But that's always been the case; the distro maintainer make the decision what to package and what not. It's not different with the service manager systemd. > since all the most-used (so, best supported) distros are deep into systemd Ever wondered why? Because it is vastly more simple an implementation target than writing bash scripts. It's more easily tested in isolation and the documentation is outstanding. > no-one is upset with any other init system Oh, I remember the heat and hate that Ubuntu got when they switched to Upstart. The reason that systemd gets all the rage is because it is the largest target with the most innovation. People always get mad when things change. People *hate* change. > or audio daemon creators Pulseaudio had to plow the way and thus got all the heat for exposing tons of bugs in the alsa kernel drivers. And what else is there besides pulseaudio? PipeWire? This is the successor to pulseaudio, the next iteration. > Something different happened with these projects. Which is...?
- JetSpiegel 4y ago
  It was XBill, and there was a fork called XLennart. Funny how his detractors spend more time on jokes than on shipping a better init daemon.
  - corrral 4y ago
    I'm like 90% sure that at some point in that era there was one called "Kill Bill" on Windows, though I do remember XBill. > Funny how his detractors spend more time on jokes than on shipping a better init daemon. Part of this might be because a high percentage of his detractors already have multiple init daemons they prefer to his.
sianemo 4y ago
I agree that the comments in this thread are uselessly snarky and uncivil, but Lennart Poettering is not just a single person who wrote software people don't like. PulseAudio has, deservedly or otherwise, been the face of audio issues in desktop Linux for coming on two decades now, and the tumultuous changeover to systemd as very nearly the mandatory init system for Linux left a sour taste for many long-time users.
- corrral 4y ago
  I don't think anyone would care (probably most of us here wouldn't even know his name) if these projects had been written and integrated such that it was trivial to avoid them in favor of alternatives. No-one who hated Upstart, say, is pissed off at the people who made it. Between Red Hat's maneuvering and Poettering's choices, though, it's not trivial to avoid them.
  - Crysstalis 4y ago
    It's very trivial to bypass those: just delete the packages off your system. Of course this means your system now won't boot, and you must expend effort to deploy a replacement. That's the actual non-trivial part. There's nothing the systemd developers can do to make that any easier for you, unless you expect them to suddenly start developing two or more init systems for some rather unclear reasons. If the problem is that your employer has required you to only use packages supported by some vendor, that's a different problem and it extends to a lot of other things besides systemd. For some perspective you might want to go talk to some people who still have to use COBOL at work...
    - corrral 4y ago
      OK so in some hypothetical sense it's fine, but in practice it's a pain in the ass to avoid. So let's go with I dislike systemd in practice.
      - Crysstalis 4y ago
        I still don't know what point you're trying to make though. To me this is like if you said "in a hypothetical sense planes are fine because you can buy a private jet, but in practice it's a pain because you know I have to fly in a crowded coach seat". Like, ok, sure, that's technically true, but still no one is going to donate you a private jet. If you had another hypothetical replacement and you could afford to spend all this time switching the company servers over and training everyone else to use it then maybe you could do something, but you don't, and the systemd developers could not help you with that even if they wanted to. What do you want anyone to do about it?
traverseda 4y ago
When his employer uses politics to try to coerce others into using that "free & gratis" software it can leave a bit of a bitter taste in your mouth. It's not that something like pulseaudio is bad so we can just ignore it, it's that pulseaudio is bad because because redhat funds a lot of gnome stuff gnome won't really work unless you use pulseaudio, and since you use gnome you now have to use systemd. If pulseaudio just existed in a vacuum I don't think anyone would have an issue with it. If it wasn't bundled into a giant ecosystem it wouldn't be so bad, and if the redhat contributors involved cared more about non-redhat stakeholders I don't think people would have nearly as much ire. But honestly writing "free & gratis" software that kind of sucks, and that forces you to use other sucky software, well I'm honestly not sure it's better than nothing. If it didn't exist I think some other solution would eventually come into being, and it might very well be a better solution. Sure it might not happen as quickly, but personally I'm alright with that. It's not charity, it's not nobility, it's just redhat building a moat around their core business.
- evol262 4y ago
  Desktop Linux is not Red Hat's core business and it hasn't been for a long, long time. Way before pulse or systemd. This is, fundamentally, a gross misunderstanding or misrepresentation of the way that open source works in general, and of the way Red Hat-employed developers in particular interacted with the ecosystem. I was in the engineering side in various positions for nearly a decade. The policy was upstream first. Open source first. If you think that the engineers at Red Hat didn't care about open source, or that anyone WANTED to invest god knows how many man hours into trying to create a sane experience from scratch, you're badly mistaken. Pulse was optional in gnome-settings-dameon for a long time, and the primary reason it's deeply integrated now is because people LIKED IT (the horror!), since it finally solved a bunch of problems with Linux audio, and the dbus backend made stuff like "media keys work out of the box" seamless. Similarly, GNOME has a dominant place in the market because... people liked it. It's market competition. GNOME had/has a place in Red Hat as the de-facto user experience for Fedora, and Fedora's principal role is user experience testing/feedback for the next version of RHEL, at all levels of the system, but the number of users who are gonna run Fedora without a shell is low. Principally, a lot of Red Hat's engineers ran (and probably run) Fedora as a development workstation, though there was a fair amount of Gentoo, Arch, Slack, and others. The only reason why there's a perception that "non-Red Hat stakeholders didn't matter" is because the vast majority of community users weren't submitting patches, and the other big vendors (SuSE, Canonical) were working on other DEs (KDE, Unity) which only shared parts. EndlessOS and other projects were GNOME because... it worked. Pulse and systemd came into being because better solutions did not, despite a bunch of effort. I've used Linux since the 90s. ALSA was better than OSS, but it had enough thorny edges that JACK still had to be a thing (and still is, for audio engineering). Pipewire is an iterative improvement on Pulse. Audio will never be done. OpenRC, Upstart, sysvinit, runit, and others were all terrible in various ways. The sheer existence of stuff like supervisord speaks to the existence of that. If I'm going to bet, it's always safe that whatever "booo systemd" person I'm speaking with has never actually had to maintain, troubleshoot, add features to, or otherwise work with pre-systemd init systems in any meaningful way. Red Hat's business is consulting (or at least that's what "platform" is, discounting OpenShift, but "platform" had been stagnant in revenue for a bit, which precipitated the buyout). It is not selling Linux. It is getting paid to help companies make Linux work for them so they can save money in other places. It is in writing features which make Linux better because some customer needs/wants it and has a bag of money, but not the in-house expertise to write it. It is not desktop Linux, and it hasn't been since RHEL3 (or maybe before that). Any argument predicated on that is built on quicksand. Don't make a Texas sharpshooter fallacy. You have (had) a bunch of very smart people who were very passionate about open source working in Linux every day, at a company with an "upstream-first" policy. They were actively working with/against desktop Linux user experience at airports, at home, on newer laptops, trying to get on Bluejeans calls, etc. It should not be surprising that they also saw problems and wrote solutions, which the gratis marketplace liked enough that they have widespread adoption. You can personally dislike those technologies, but condemning their existence is just a different way of saying "I don't like open source when ideas I don't like succeed".
_ofdw 4y ago
>How can grown ass adults be so pathetically mean to a single person because he wrote (free & gratis!) software they don't like. Seriously, it's mystifying. Because he and his orbiters were extraordinarily arrogant and condescending about their software. And let's not forget that while it's pretty good now, in the early days systemd was not very good at all. Because things like GNOME 3 decided to make systemd a hard dependency, pretty soon it became nearly impossible to avoid using the entire systemd stack even though it was nominally modular. It's not just that he wrote $thing that someone didn't like. It's that $thing got shoved down everyone's throats at a time when $thing didn't work very well, and then when people rightfully objected, they were belittled by Poettering and his fan base.
- zozbot234 4y ago
  But it's not Poettering, it's the Gnome folks in general. These controversies have been around since the early Gnome 2.x days. Nothing much has changed. What we really need is for people to propose alternatives to systemD that address its purported use cases while removing some of the needless complexity it introduces, and restoring the primacy of general mechanisms over hacked-together policy. This has happened with some components, e.g. elogind but not really as a comprehensive effort.
  - traverseda 4y ago
    OpenRC and alpine are nice.
    - corrral 4y ago
      OpenRC is the only Linux init I've used that I actually enjoyed using, not just could-tolerate.
      - 0des 4y ago
        sysvinit did nothing wrong.
      - hakfoo 4y ago
shrubble 4y ago
The combination of unbridled arrogance along with the dubious technical merits of your all-or-nothing design decisions, can lead to that; so, hardly mystifying. Why does systemd need to mess with user processes and home directories? It was billed as a replacement for init.
- sophacles 4y ago
  Then don't use it. No one is forcing you, there exist alternatives. Attacking someone for making an optional thing seems kinda like the problem lies in you.
  - corrral 4y ago
    Might be worth pondering what Poettering and Red Hat did that make people hate their work so much, and to make Poettering uniquely infamous in the open source world. No-one's upset with the creators of dozens of other init systems and audio daemons, including ones that are pretty bad, and even ones that were promoted by major distro vendors.
    - sophacles 4y ago
      From my point of view as an old guy who remembers the hell of init scripts, what they did was make an alternative to remembering arcane details of how each os and distro chose to set up their scripts. This: * made debugging a random system a lot more straight forward * made putting up software for packaging a lot easier * made customizing the start-up of a daemon a lot easier (this ties in with the first point) * made it so I didn't have to go to the guru who's only job seemed to be managing our obtuse set of init scripts that were extra baroque because order of startup really mattered. That guy I had to go to - he was an asshole an lorded his knowledge of arcana over anyone who brought him a question. I'm 90% sure he made it intentionally complex since he didn't have much skill beyond memorizing those silly facts (this is the same guy who got an entire project reassigned to me because he couldn't understand the concept of functions when I removed some extreme repetition from a python script he wrote). Most of the systemd haters remind me of this guy. I guess what you're implying is that he helped automate away dead weight and that made the leeches mad?
hdjjhhvvhga 4y ago
> because he wrote (free & gratis!) software they don't like I don't think you understand what the story was.
- esarbe 4y ago
  That's the story; he proposed new software and his employer liked the idea and paid him to develop that idea. End of story. People getting mad because they are "forced" to use a free software system? That's the fan-fiction from the peanut gallery.
  - corrral 4y ago
    So why's no-one mad at any other init or audio daemon authors? Poettering just had bad luck?
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - kaba0 4y ago
      Because there is no other* that actually works properly to even get half as popular? * there is now pipewire which will hopefully overtake pulseaudio though
      - corrral 4y ago
        There were popular audio daemons before PulseAudio took over, though. It's not like it entered a completely empty "market", if you will. Nobody was mad at the authors of those, even though in fact they did also suck. Nobody seems upset over Pipewire. So I don't think you've found the reason.
  - hdjjhhvvhga 4y ago
    > That's the story; he proposed new software and his employer liked the idea and paid him to develop that idea. End of story. If this was the story the comments in this thread would have been very different.
plorkyeran 4y ago
At time of writing I don't see a single comment attacking him personally outside of the replies to you complaining about it. I was actually somewhat surprised to see the comments only complaining about his software (and even those are currently a minority of the comments) rather than going the usual route of calling him an awful person.
boxmonster 4y ago
I don't know anything about Systemd or PulseAudio, but this Lennart Poettering must be quite a trailblazer based on the number of arrow shot into his back
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

by tpush 4y ago

corrral 4y ago

People dislike his work for various reasons but are still forced to use it thanks, in part, to his employer promoting it aggressively (it's not like he did all this for free). That's a recipe for saltiness. Kinda like Bill Gates back in the day (remember that "Kill Bill" game, and other similar ones?)

esarbe 4y ago
No one is forced to use it - you can always switch distro. I also use hyperbole as a rhetoric instrument but in text seldom works.
- corrral 4y ago
  At work you may not have that choice, especially since all the most-used (so, best supported) distros are deep into systemd now, or if you have a distro that you otherwise like but that has switched to systemd. It's possible to prefer something over alternatives but still think it's worse than it used to be, or could be better, or to very much dislike one part of it. Again, much like Windows and other MS products. People effectively had to use them ("well technically they could quit their jobs instead, so they didn't really have to"—LOL), which sets up circumstances for some serious hate. To repeat what I've written elsewhere, no-one is upset with any other init system or audio daemon creators, even if they don't like the software. Something different happened with these projects.
  - JetSpiegel 4y ago
    > well technically they could quit their jobs instead, so they didn't really have to There are jobs which force you to use Linux, and SystemD in particular? Where do I sign up?
  - esarbe 4y ago
    > At work you may not have that choice, If you cannot switch the distro, then you deal with it. That's the tyranny of not using Linux-From-Scratch. But that's always been the case; the distro maintainer make the decision what to package and what not. It's not different with the service manager systemd. > since all the most-used (so, best supported) distros are deep into systemd Ever wondered why? Because it is vastly more simple an implementation target than writing bash scripts. It's more easily tested in isolation and the documentation is outstanding. > no-one is upset with any other init system Oh, I remember the heat and hate that Ubuntu got when they switched to Upstart. The reason that systemd gets all the rage is because it is the largest target with the most innovation. People always get mad when things change. People *hate* change. > or audio daemon creators Pulseaudio had to plow the way and thus got all the heat for exposing tons of bugs in the alsa kernel drivers. And what else is there besides pulseaudio? PipeWire? This is the successor to pulseaudio, the next iteration. > Something different happened with these projects. Which is...?
JetSpiegel 4y ago
It was XBill, and there was a fork called XLennart. Funny how his detractors spend more time on jokes than on shipping a better init daemon.
- corrral 4y ago
  I'm like 90% sure that at some point in that era there was one called "Kill Bill" on Windows, though I do remember XBill. > Funny how his detractors spend more time on jokes than on shipping a better init daemon. Part of this might be because a high percentage of his detractors already have multiple init daemons they prefer to his.

sianemo 4y ago

I agree that the comments in this thread are uselessly snarky and uncivil, but Lennart Poettering is not just a single person who wrote software people don't like. PulseAudio has, deservedly or otherwise, been the face of audio issues in desktop Linux for coming on two decades now, and the tumultuous changeover to systemd as very nearly the mandatory init system for Linux left a sour taste for many long-time users.

corrral 4y ago
I don't think anyone would care (probably most of us here wouldn't even know his name) if these projects had been written and integrated such that it was trivial to avoid them in favor of alternatives. No-one who hated Upstart, say, is pissed off at the people who made it. Between Red Hat's maneuvering and Poettering's choices, though, it's not trivial to avoid them.
- Crysstalis 4y ago
  It's very trivial to bypass those: just delete the packages off your system. Of course this means your system now won't boot, and you must expend effort to deploy a replacement. That's the actual non-trivial part. There's nothing the systemd developers can do to make that any easier for you, unless you expect them to suddenly start developing two or more init systems for some rather unclear reasons. If the problem is that your employer has required you to only use packages supported by some vendor, that's a different problem and it extends to a lot of other things besides systemd. For some perspective you might want to go talk to some people who still have to use COBOL at work...
  - corrral 4y ago
    OK so in some hypothetical sense it's fine, but in practice it's a pain in the ass to avoid. So let's go with I dislike systemd in practice.
    - Crysstalis 4y ago
      I still don't know what point you're trying to make though. To me this is like if you said "in a hypothetical sense planes are fine because you can buy a private jet, but in practice it's a pain because you know I have to fly in a crowded coach seat". Like, ok, sure, that's technically true, but still no one is going to donate you a private jet. If you had another hypothetical replacement and you could afford to spend all this time switching the company servers over and training everyone else to use it then maybe you could do something, but you don't, and the systemd developers could not help you with that even if they wanted to. What do you want anyone to do about it?

traverseda 4y ago

When his employer uses politics to try to coerce others into using that "free & gratis" software it can leave a bit of a bitter taste in your mouth. It's not that something like pulseaudio is bad so we can just ignore it, it's that pulseaudio is bad because because redhat funds a lot of gnome stuff gnome won't really work unless you use pulseaudio, and since you use gnome you now have to use systemd. If pulseaudio just existed in a vacuum I don't think anyone would have an issue with it. If it wasn't bundled into a giant ecosystem it wouldn't be so bad, and if the redhat contributors involved cared more about non-redhat stakeholders I don't think people would have nearly as much ire. But honestly writing "free & gratis" software that kind of sucks, and that forces you to use other sucky software, well I'm honestly not sure it's better than nothing. If it didn't exist I think some other solution would eventually come into being, and it might very well be a better solution. Sure it might not happen as quickly, but personally I'm alright with that. It's not charity, it's not nobility, it's just redhat building a moat around their core business.

evol262 4y ago
Desktop Linux is not Red Hat's core business and it hasn't been for a long, long time. Way before pulse or systemd. This is, fundamentally, a gross misunderstanding or misrepresentation of the way that open source works in general, and of the way Red Hat-employed developers in particular interacted with the ecosystem. I was in the engineering side in various positions for nearly a decade. The policy was upstream first. Open source first. If you think that the engineers at Red Hat didn't care about open source, or that anyone WANTED to invest god knows how many man hours into trying to create a sane experience from scratch, you're badly mistaken. Pulse was optional in gnome-settings-dameon for a long time, and the primary reason it's deeply integrated now is because people LIKED IT (the horror!), since it finally solved a bunch of problems with Linux audio, and the dbus backend made stuff like "media keys work out of the box" seamless. Similarly, GNOME has a dominant place in the market because... people liked it. It's market competition. GNOME had/has a place in Red Hat as the de-facto user experience for Fedora, and Fedora's principal role is user experience testing/feedback for the next version of RHEL, at all levels of the system, but the number of users who are gonna run Fedora without a shell is low. Principally, a lot of Red Hat's engineers ran (and probably run) Fedora as a development workstation, though there was a fair amount of Gentoo, Arch, Slack, and others. The only reason why there's a perception that "non-Red Hat stakeholders didn't matter" is because the vast majority of community users weren't submitting patches, and the other big vendors (SuSE, Canonical) were working on other DEs (KDE, Unity) which only shared parts. EndlessOS and other projects were GNOME because... it worked. Pulse and systemd came into being because better solutions did not, despite a bunch of effort. I've used Linux since the 90s. ALSA was better than OSS, but it had enough thorny edges that JACK still had to be a thing (and still is, for audio engineering). Pipewire is an iterative improvement on Pulse. Audio will never be done. OpenRC, Upstart, sysvinit, runit, and others were all terrible in various ways. The sheer existence of stuff like supervisord speaks to the existence of that. If I'm going to bet, it's always safe that whatever "booo systemd" person I'm speaking with has never actually had to maintain, troubleshoot, add features to, or otherwise work with pre-systemd init systems in any meaningful way. Red Hat's business is consulting (or at least that's what "platform" is, discounting OpenShift, but "platform" had been stagnant in revenue for a bit, which precipitated the buyout). It is not selling Linux. It is getting paid to help companies make Linux work for them so they can save money in other places. It is in writing features which make Linux better because some customer needs/wants it and has a bag of money, but not the in-house expertise to write it. It is not desktop Linux, and it hasn't been since RHEL3 (or maybe before that). Any argument predicated on that is built on quicksand. Don't make a Texas sharpshooter fallacy. You have (had) a bunch of very smart people who were very passionate about open source working in Linux every day, at a company with an "upstream-first" policy. They were actively working with/against desktop Linux user experience at airports, at home, on newer laptops, trying to get on Bluejeans calls, etc. It should not be surprising that they also saw problems and wrote solutions, which the gratis marketplace liked enough that they have widespread adoption. You can personally dislike those technologies, but condemning their existence is just a different way of saying "I don't like open source when ideas I don't like succeed".

_ofdw 4y ago

>How can grown ass adults be so pathetically mean to a single person because he wrote (free & gratis!) software they don't like. Seriously, it's mystifying. Because he and his orbiters were extraordinarily arrogant and condescending about their software. And let's not forget that while it's pretty good now, in the early days systemd was not very good at all. Because things like GNOME 3 decided to make systemd a hard dependency, pretty soon it became nearly impossible to avoid using the entire systemd stack even though it was nominally modular. It's not just that he wrote $thing that someone didn't like. It's that $thing got shoved down everyone's throats at a time when $thing didn't work very well, and then when people rightfully objected, they were belittled by Poettering and his fan base.

zozbot234 4y ago
But it's not Poettering, it's the Gnome folks in general. These controversies have been around since the early Gnome 2.x days. Nothing much has changed. What we really need is for people to propose alternatives to systemD that address its purported use cases while removing some of the needless complexity it introduces, and restoring the primacy of general mechanisms over hacked-together policy. This has happened with some components, e.g. elogind but not really as a comprehensive effort.
- traverseda 4y ago
  OpenRC and alpine are nice.
  - corrral 4y ago
    OpenRC is the only Linux init I've used that I actually enjoyed using, not just could-tolerate.
    - 0des 4y ago
      sysvinit did nothing wrong.
    - hakfoo 4y ago

shrubble 4y ago

The combination of unbridled arrogance along with the dubious technical merits of your all-or-nothing design decisions, can lead to that; so, hardly mystifying. Why does systemd need to mess with user processes and home directories? It was billed as a replacement for init.

sophacles 4y ago
Then don't use it. No one is forcing you, there exist alternatives. Attacking someone for making an optional thing seems kinda like the problem lies in you.
- corrral 4y ago
  Might be worth pondering what Poettering and Red Hat did that make people hate their work so much, and to make Poettering uniquely infamous in the open source world. No-one's upset with the creators of dozens of other init systems and audio daemons, including ones that are pretty bad, and even ones that were promoted by major distro vendors.
  - sophacles 4y ago
    From my point of view as an old guy who remembers the hell of init scripts, what they did was make an alternative to remembering arcane details of how each os and distro chose to set up their scripts. This: * made debugging a random system a lot more straight forward * made putting up software for packaging a lot easier * made customizing the start-up of a daemon a lot easier (this ties in with the first point) * made it so I didn't have to go to the guru who's only job seemed to be managing our obtuse set of init scripts that were extra baroque because order of startup really mattered. That guy I had to go to - he was an asshole an lorded his knowledge of arcana over anyone who brought him a question. I'm 90% sure he made it intentionally complex since he didn't have much skill beyond memorizing those silly facts (this is the same guy who got an entire project reassigned to me because he couldn't understand the concept of functions when I removed some extreme repetition from a python script he wrote). Most of the systemd haters remind me of this guy. I guess what you're implying is that he helped automate away dead weight and that made the leeches mad?

hdjjhhvvhga 4y ago

> because he wrote (free & gratis!) software they don't like I don't think you understand what the story was.

esarbe 4y ago
That's the story; he proposed new software and his employer liked the idea and paid him to develop that idea. End of story. People getting mad because they are "forced" to use a free software system? That's the fan-fiction from the peanut gallery.
- corrral 4y ago
  So why's no-one mad at any other init or audio daemon authors? Poettering just had bad luck?
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - kaba0 4y ago
    Because there is no other* that actually works properly to even get half as popular? * there is now pipewire which will hopefully overtake pulseaudio though
    - corrral 4y ago
      There were popular audio daemons before PulseAudio took over, though. It's not like it entered a completely empty "market", if you will. Nobody was mad at the authors of those, even though in fact they did also suck. Nobody seems upset over Pipewire. So I don't think you've found the reason.
- hdjjhhvvhga 4y ago
  > That's the story; he proposed new software and his employer liked the idea and paid him to develop that idea. End of story. If this was the story the comments in this thread would have been very different.

plorkyeran 4y ago

At time of writing I don't see a single comment attacking him personally outside of the replies to you complaining about it. I was actually somewhat surprised to see the comments only complaining about his software (and even those are currently a minority of the comments) rather than going the usual route of calling him an awful person.

boxmonster 4y ago

I don't know anything about Systemd or PulseAudio, but this Lennart Poettering must be quite a trailblazer based on the number of arrow shot into his back

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]