On Sunday 2012-12-30 15:02, Tomasz Torcz wrote: >On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 03:30:08PM -0500, nick black wrote: >> - at some point, either debian or the derivative might lurch in a new >> direction. in either case, carefully-crafted, minimal new >> TARGET_-specific code (or however you choose to do it) can mirror the >> divergence. all scripts continue to work. > > At this point derevative should stop and think. Is this diversion really >needed (hint: almost never is)? What advantages this diversion brings, if >any?
Diversity, of course. >If it's a good idea, why upstream did not go this way? Sometimes, upstream(s) are seen as uncooperative, or simply going a "boring" way - derivates like going where no upstream has gone before. There is not always just a single answer to a given problem. That is why there is not only sysvinit or just systemd. _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
