On Sat, 21 Mar 2015 16:00:40 -0500
"T.J. Duchene" <t.j.duchene@???> wrote:

>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Didier Kryn [mailto:kryn@in2p3.fr]
> > Sent: Saturday, March 21, 2015 11:04 AM
> > To: dng@???
> > Subject: Re: [Dng] Devuan commitments - will trade-off be applied?
> >

> >      We all agree that Devuan was born to be systemd-free and this
> > looks like a sustainable goal to begin with. But I understood this
> > thread started with questioning the long term policy.

>
> [T.J. Duchene] Nothing wrong with that. I'm just and only saying
> that if Devuan's goal is to release Devuan 1.0, then the best and
> most reliable QA process would be not to support anything related to
> systemd in the initial release. For the time being, system is out of
> the question. It can always be reevaluated in Devuan 1.5 or 2.0 but
> to bring "systemd support" up now is a distraction. The initial
> policy should be followed, and this should be tabled until after
> Devuan 1.0 is completed. It's all a question of follow-through.
> Devuan 1.0 is a critical thing, and the project has to "make good"
> and deliver; Devuan can't change policy without having to reconsider
> every piece of work already completed. I feel that is
> counterproductive.
>
>
>

> >      However, the long term policy of Devuan can't be "We hate
> > systemd and Lennart Poetering". Instead Devuan should advertize the
> > reasons to reject software like systemd, in the form of  a set of
> > rules for acceptability, in a sensible and attractive form, for
> > users, developpers, and distros to easily share. I see these rules
> > as an addendum to the definition of free software.

> >
> [T.J. Duchene] While I admit that seems to be the "flavor of the day"
> from some, I don't hate anyone. I don't have time to be petty; I have
> work to do. With respect to everyone, I simply do not care if they
> disagree with me or not, and I say so. That does not mean that I am
> unreasonable or won't admit when I am wrong.
>
> >

> >       This leaves no room for systemd-contaminated software, except
> > if the systemd API can be replaced by  a do-otherwise/do-nothing
> > stub.

>
> [T.J. Duchene] Frankly, Didier, I think that that is inevitable that
> Devuan 2.0 (and after) will have to include a systemd shim or stub.
> Third party projects upstream are going to do whatever is in the best
> interests of their users, and asking them to do otherwise - that is
> unreasonable. The majority of their users have systemd, whether we
> personally like it or not. Some form of API support will be needed.
>
> See you!
> T.J.


T.J.

Do you understand what mailing list this is? Why in the *world* would
we go to the substantial trouble of depoetterizing Debian if we wanted
systemd to sneak back in via some form of API. And as far as the
majority of users having systemd, no, the majority of users have
Windows, and that doesn't tempt me to make the OS I work with everyday
more Windows like. "Most users" don't cut no ice in LinuxLand.

Hey, we're not telling you not to use systemd. There's Debian, Red Hat,
Fedora, Arch, OpenSuSE, and dozens more. Why you want Devuan to have
any accommodation for systemd is a mystery to me.

And speaking just for me, myself, and I, I *do* hate systemd, that's my
choice, I got kicked off Debian-User for that reason, I'm proud of
that, and if this all makes me petty, I'm proud to be petty. Hey T.J.,
you're not in ArmstrongLand anymore: *lots* of us here hate everything
systemd represents, and don't want the slightest vestige of it on our
machines.

SteveT

Steve Litt                *  http://www.troubleshooters.com/
Troubleshooting Training  *  Human Performance