On Saturday, 29 de November de 2014 18:34:37 Matteo Panella escribió:
> On 29/11/2014 18:28, Haines Brown wrote:
> > While I'm at it, I'd also like to see udev cease being default and
> > replaced by eudev. I'm interested in people's thoughts about this.
>
> Usual disclaimer: I speak only for myself.
>
> TL;DR: it can't coexist in the archive with systemd-udev without
> introducing ugly hacks with metapackages, sorting out and assuring
> ABI-compatibility for libudev and libgudev is a pain in the neck, but
> that aside it could be done.

So let's do it. We are here for a reason. Not to chat, but to work and make
user's freedom a first line flag.
>
> Now for the longer explanation.
[...]
> The ugly part is coexistence in the archive: simply put, you can't have
> both without rewriting the control file for all rdeps or introducing an
> insane number of metapackages _in the main Debian archive_ (I guess
> ftpmaster would have a thing or two to say about it...).

We do NOT depend on Debian's (wonderful) FTPmasters team anymore. We will
depend on the Devuan whatever-it-will-be-called team, commited to freedom as
we all are. So if the job needs to be done, it is just a matter of doing it.
If we need five hundred metapackages, we'll do it. Compatibility with Debian is
not sacred, it is just a goal, while users' freedom is sacred for us.
>
> The last part is controversial, because if Devuan adopts eudev it would
> have to effectively mask out systemd-udev by shipping packages with the
> same names but higher priority, negating the freedom of choice to end
> users (quite ironic, isn't it?).

Not ironic, as long as our higher priority packages (or just higher version)
are able to work with udev, eudev and whateverudev.

Regards

Noel
er Envite