Before we cast stones at Gnome, let's remember that the Debian project from
which Devuan is descended has done a good many screwed up things in its
history, besides locking their distribution into systemd. We can't pose as
paragons of virtue.

I support getting GNOME to be available out-of-the-box Devuan. The
counter-arguments were not compelling.

Indeed, supporting GNOME this way would probably piss off the very people
who made stupid decisions at GNOME, so what's not to like? It's not clear
that I have time to code (I am shopping a start-up to VCs right now, as
well as my usual consulting to law firms and their customers) but maybe I
will.

It seems to me that expanding on the current libsystemd0 stub so that
it *actually
does something *but *is still not systemd *would be a good way to go. And
would fruitfully piss people who work on systemd off, so again what's not
to like? Faking out package dependencies seems fine to me, as well. No
reason to hack systemd out of multiple things when you can do that.

    Thanks

    Bruce

On Sat, Jun 17, 2017 at 11:07 PM, Taiidan@??? <Taiidan@???> wrote:

> On 06/17/2017 01:25 PM, Bruce Perens wrote:
>
> Can we be a little more focused, please? Gnome went for systemd. While I
>> don't think it was a good decision, it should not cause you to write off
>> the entirety of Gnome for their lack of philososophical purity.
>>
> A philosophical purity issue would be a compile script that asks to
> install SystemD deps and lists it as the "recommended" choice even though
> it isn't really required.
>
> What they did is inexcusable from a linux/gnu perspective, there is no
> reason as to why a window manager should force an init system on you.
>
> Considering the fact that at the current rate of assimilation in 5 years
> you simply won't be able to have a modern server/desktop without systemd or
> some kind of interpreter library we simply can't be indifferent about this.
>