Michael Gilbert <mgilb...@debian.org> writes: > On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 6:52 AM, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> But it was way behind both systemd and upstart in terms of readiness in >> Debian going into this discussion, and the amount of catching up that's >> required here for it to displace upstart as my second choice just >> doesn't seem feasible for me. > Shouldn't this be seen as reason to slow things down? Using a > bureaucratic quality like "readiness" to make a technical decision seems > like a contradiction. At some point we have to make a decision. We picked now. This time is not obviously worse than any other time. There's always going to be one more system, or one more project, or one more set of features, that might change the situation. upstart developers want to add socket activation. systemd is going to be integrating with kdbus. The world is always going to change. If we wait for everything to stop changing, we'll never make a decision at all. This argument has been ripping Debian apart for over a year, causing a lot of serious unhappiness, very unpleasant threads in debian-devel, frustrated maintainers, and maintainers who feel like they have to force the issue in order to continue with their work. The absence of a decision is causing quite a lot of pain and is very demotivating to a lot of developers. I don't want to just let that continue until people give up and find something else to do with their volunteer time. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
