On Sunday, 30 de November de 2014 17:28:45 Miles Fidelman escribió:
> [left out a rather important clause in my 2nd sentence]
>
> Franco Lanza wrote:
> > On Sun, Nov 30, 2014 at 12:54:23PM +0000, Noel Torres wrote:
> >> Do not look at me so fiercy.
> >>
> >> For me Devuan is about freedom. Specifically users' freedom. And with
> >> init freedom as a starting point.
> >
> > As already known, we are NOT against systemd. We are pro-freedom.
> > Systemd WILL BE supported in devuan. Just not in the same manner as it
> > is in debian where it eat whole system.
>
> As a matter of priorities and framing:
>
> Including systemd, even as an option - maybe particularly as an option -
> SEEMS A DANGEROUS DIVERSION OF EFFORT. Given that there are well-funded
> folks working very hard, and openly, to make sure that systemd inherently
> engulfs and devours systems it runs on - it will take a huge amount of
> effort to accommodate systemd as an "option." Witness the effort going
> into constantly revising
> systemd-shim as the systemd interfaces keep shifting. Getting pulled
> into this kind of activity strikes me as a serious, perhaps fatal,
> diversion of effort.
> [...]
>
I never said "now" nor anything remotely similar. What I wanted to express
quite clearly is that we should not hate systemd. Hate is not technically
sound and does not help anybody. What I made is a clear statement about users'
freedom, up to and including using systemd from Devuan if they wish.

Of course there are priorities, and of course there are ines we should not
cross.

Rejecting systemd because of it is systemd is not one of them. Rejecting it
because it is hard to do is not an option. Delaying it because there are mor
important things to do now is. Rejecting systemd while we can not make it a
risk for users' freedom is, as well.

Cheers

Noel
er Envite