On Mar 21, 2012 10:57 AM, "Svante Signell" <svante.sign...@telia.com> wrote: > > On Wed, 2012-03-21 at 14:44 +0100, Tollef Fog Heen wrote: > > ]] Svante Signell > > > > Regarding who is expert or not, can the people who considers themselves > > > as such (others shouldn't bother) do a _scientific_ comparison of the > > > three alternatives with respect to important features. First step would > > > be to write down which aspects are important, and continue from there. > > > Also, practical experiments are needed to verify statements made. > > > > I'd rather work on making systemd better and a better init system for > > Debian than to satisfy some academic desire for a comparison of init > > systems. > > How on earth would anybody be able to make a decision if there are no > comparisons between the alternatives available? Throw a dice, rely on > gut feelings, or what? Since everybody is so damned biased in opinions, > I don't see any alternative to making a thorough investigation. This > could be a useful GSoC task. If case the "experts" approve that somebody > not senior or expert enough enough do the work. This would be much more > intersting than writing a systemd-to-initscript converter. > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org > Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1332341808.2962.264.ca...@s1499.it.kth.se >
FYI, some level of analysis between the three init systems has been done. See [1]. 1. http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/why.html A bit of a disclaimer here, this comparison was done by a systemd developer. OTOH he makes quite a convincing argument for systemd. ~ Andres