On 14/05/15 19:15, T.J. Duchene wrote:
>> I think the fact that I pointed out clearly shows that there is very good
>> technical reason to exclude udev, unless you are willing to be the maintainer
>> of udev outside systemd source tree in Devuan.
> [T.J. ] Please understand that I very much respect your position, and I agree with you that a "put up or shut up" attitude can be warranted in many instances. However, I do not believe that this is one of them. The shortest and most reasonable route to release a stable 1.0 of Devuan is to use udev for the present. THAT in and of itself trumps your concerns in my opinion. I will admit that I find Jude's proposal intriguing - but it is hardly ready for use. Eudev might make a good replacement, but udev is still the best candidate in terms of people using it if you follow the principle that "eyes make bugs shallow".
>
> What I am going to say next is no reflection on you, nor anyone else here. But since the subject came up, I will be straightforward with you. I know that some might take offense to what I am going to say, and that's fine. If you feel that I should not make future comment, then by all means, please ignore me, and I won't speak further with you on the subject.
>
> I could maintain udev, if I were actually part of Devuan. While I have recently returned to the list, I am waiting to see what Devuan is going to do with 1.0 before I decide to commit any effort to the project. If one of the VUAs asked me to assist with a specific task, I would consider it - but otherwise, I will not. Past experience with the Devuan community has left me in a position of uncertainty about becoming actively involved at all. From my point of view, past conversations here have been as "toxic" as Debian and the rest of Linux in general.
>
> I find that tiresome, and until I see something to inspire me, I am unmoved.
>
>
> Best regards
> T.J.
>

Hello T.J.,

I didn't mean to express anything related to "put up or shut up". This
is a public forum so anybody can express their opinions. For me, I don't
really care whether everybody else agree or not on my opinions so I
don't really take it seriously.

This is similar to my comment to Noel the other day, in regards to the
effort and freedom of choice. So my opinion remains the same.

What I thought important for Devuan now is to be ready and to release
the first version. So I am sorry that I always post strong opinions on
the ideas that I thought might distract the development of Devuan,
especially on the ideas in providing choices for the users without
considering the efforts in implementing and maintaining them in Devuan.
It would be totally different story if the ones who post the idea would
be willing to volunteer to do that in Devuan. I don't think anybody in
the core Devuan development team would ask everybody individually for
that. I believe everybody who share the same interest can volunteer and
join Devuan development team. Unfortunately, I am not a programmer
otherwise I would volunteer myself to maintain packages for Devuan.

In regards to udev, I cannot find any Debian style udev package source
that is being maintained outside systemd source tree so far, a part from
the one in Debian wheezy which is quite old. That tells me that it is
not worth the effort to maintain it outside systemd source tree. But if
you knew anything about that, please do share that with us. Perhaps
somebody who has the skill could take that and add it into Devuan
package source.

Cheers,

Anto