Jóhann B. Guðmundsson schreef op 16-08-2016 18:58:
I personally recommend the project should stick with the original line drew in the sand, for the master branch and all the "experimental" stuff which may or may not come to pass, be kept in it's own experimental branch which would be the best of the both worlds I would think. Downstream that want stability get what they want and are less likely to experience any sudden *surprises* and those that want the experimental stuff for whatever reason like testing get what they want.
Not wanting to barge in here, but it seems to me that your disagreement is not necessarily a principle stance, but merely the fact that different people have different principle stances that conflict.
And so they conflict and if one party wants upstream to happen first and the other party wants downstream to happen first, you are at a stalemate. And it is not so much because intermixing seems bad but because you have a practical problem which is that some developer refuses to do something because it hasn't been upstreamed yet.
This refusal that you considered perfectly reasonable seems the only obstacle here for you. And then it becomes a problem if other people do not also follow that principle. But instead of making other people more strict, I would suggest you focus on making the other party less strict. It seems this strictness is the only problem here, instead of the solution.
Regards. _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
