Theodore Y. Ts'o - 31.10.19, 16:03:29 CET: > On Thu, Oct 31, 2019 at 01:19:56PM +0100, Martin Steigerwald wrote: > > alienate me away from Debian. This laptop, for the sake of packaging > > flexible I/O tester, is the last of my machines still running on > > Debian. All the others are running Devuan. I am not looking back. I > > have no intention what so ever to switch back to Systemd again. For > > that reason I for example use unbound instead of knot-resolver. > > Cause I still have a choice which upstream projects to choose. If I > > would not be able to run Debian with sysvinit or runit in the end I > > might also drop my packaging and at least some other contributions > > to Debian at one point in time. > I think there was mis-undrestanding about what I was trying to say. > My basic premise is that we can't *force* people to work on > technology. Debian is a volunteer organization. So we can't force > people to work on improving elogind.
Sure. I totally get that. I replied to your mail, since you mentioned that for you integrating Debian core infrastructure like dpkg or apt with Systemd would be something new and different. So while I chose your mail to reply to as you summarized this so accurately, I really responded to the intention to use Systemd features within core Debian packages. > However, that's *different* from adopting new dependencies on systemd > as part of Debian packaging or core Debian packages. If KDE or GNOME > wants to add new systemd dependencies, that's GNOME's or KDE's > decision. But if Debian decides to do something which makes it harder Sure. For KDE I am pretty confident they won't. And if they would… I and others would probably speak out loudly that this may not be such a good idea. > for sysvinit, we need to think ***really** hard about whether it's > worth it, and I would claim the default answer is we shouldn't make > the change unless there are darned good reasons to do so. I fully second this. > It may be that sysvinit is doomed. But we shouldn't be accelerating > the process. Or it may not be. It is similar with "the" cloud. All say it will disrupt everything around… and it does. Yet, there are attempts to disrupt the cloud already by making machines powerful enough that they do not need a centralized cloud provider even if storing a huge lot of data. Or with the climate. I can respond to things like this in a way "Oh, we are doomed it does not make sense to do anything about it" or say "Let's challenge this and see what comes out of it". For the climate it is of course way more important to challenge how we are doing things, but it has been and will continue to be challenged for Systemd as well. And yes, in a way Systemd challenged the status quo. As well as "the" cloud. But eventually both will be challenged again. As for Debian for me the question would also be: Are we just following the lead of other distributions? Or are we actually inventing things not seen elsewhere. Just implementing more of Systemd integration would not be anything new. Others have been there before. What makes Debian unique these days if not the community? -- Martin
