Ansgar <[email protected]> writes: > It's mostly that it pushes systemd preference a bit more than my > preference, mostly because the short text also reads "Focus on systemd > for [...] other facilities", but I have no preference for systemd over > other implementations for "other facilities".
> I see value in cross-distribution collaboration which might be an > advantage of solutions developed under the systemd umbrella, but that's > not inherent so: it's the same for any other non-Debian specific > implementation. > Debian-specific solutions of course are also still fine if we believe > these to be the best fit to our needs. Yeah, this is all a good point. I *think* it would work out the same in practice, but there's definitely a good argument to be made for toning it down a little to better reflect what I think the viewpoint is of systemd proponents. I think the median view of that perspective is closer to yours (use the things that make sense taking into account cross-distribution compatibility and other advantages) than to "prefer systemd across the board." -- Russ Allbery ([email protected]) <https://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
