On Sat, Jun 17, 2017 at 03:02:01AM +0200, Dragan FOSS wrote:
> On 17.06.2017. 02:39, Bruce Perens wrote:
> >I don't see any problem with a generic interface to the things that
> >libsystemd does , if one could be arrived at, or if the current API is
> >sufficiently generic.
>
>
> I don't see any purpose that *any* package has a libsystemd dependency in
> distribution with systemd removed?

Dragan, believe it or not, there are more fancy things to do in Devuan
than just stripping libsystemd0 from the dependencies. You are right,
in a system that does not have systemd, libsystemd0 is useless. And
removing it from almost all packages that currently have such
"Depends: " is straightforward.

The drawback is that any package that we fork from Debian must be
*maintained* by us. Meaning that you have to keep up-to-date with new
versions, upstream bugs, user requests, and the like. So, if there are
enough maintainers who want to take this responsibility and
de-libsystemd0-ise several packages and *maintain* them over time,
then they are welcome. We don't need people who remove libsystemd0
from a package and then abandon that package to its destiny: this will
only make Devuan worse and worse over time. And we don't have the
hundreds of maintainers that Debian has, so we must focus energies in
a careful manner.

Devuan is not just about making the point that having a Linux system
without systemd is possible. Devuan is about drawing a new,
alternative, sustainable path to systemd-infested distros, which
entails development in infrastructure and services, besides the mere
list of packages provided.

My2Cents

KatolaZ

-- 
[ ~.,_  Enzo Nicosia aka KatolaZ - GLUGCT -- Freaknet Medialab  ]  
[     "+.  katolaz [at] freaknet.org --- katolaz [at] yahoo.it  ]
[       @)   http://kalos.mine.nu ---  Devuan GNU + Linux User  ]
[     @@)  http://maths.qmul.ac.uk/~vnicosia --  GPG: 0B5F062F  ] 
[ (@@@)  Twitter: @KatolaZ - skype: katolaz -- github: KatolaZ  ]