question for you:  which would you have Debian developers do:

A: complain about historical issues in systemd that have largely been
patched or addressed
B: complain about what systemd is like now
C: submit patches to systemd that fix outstanding bugs
D: submit patches to systemd that fix outstanding bugs and enable the
non-initialization portions of systemd to work with other initialization
systems like OpenRC

If you selected A or B, I think I can identify your problem.  You seem to
have a mind set more typical of Moronix or Microsoft in which the existence
of software packages *in the past* is all those software packages *will
ever be in the future*.

While that might be an accurate assumption to be made of proprietary
software that is largely published and then only patched when something
breaks, such models are generally not true to Open Source Software packages
like KDE, the Linux Kernel, or Libre Office.  Such software packages
typically learn from coding mistakes in the past and new versions actively
address various issues. E.G. a very popular point right now is how the
lessons and resources from the Nepomuk development are being leveraged in
the development of Nepomuk 2.0, aka Baloo. :: Another popular point in
recent weeks can be found in the Open-Source X.org Radeon drivers starting
to trade blows in OpenGL 3.x class rendering with the proprietary Catalyst
driver set. :: Need I continue?

Now, I won't argue that the Gnome-Shell software is crapware; and you won't
find me arguing against similar points on GTK in general. The Gnome-Shell
and GTK developers are formed of infamous cliques that have done more to
discourage modern developers than encourage them. Need I point out Valve's
observations on the differences between QT and GTK development and the
interaction with upstream developers... or in the case of GTK... the lack
of interaction with upstream and existing developers.

I will argue that writing off systemd so quickly is a huge mistake. Do keep
in mind that with less than half the development time (2010~2014) compared
to Canonical's Upstart (2006~2014), the systemd initialization system alone
managed to reach at least on-paper parity; if not in-practice parity; with
the older software package. A large part of that rapid pace of comparative
development was the loss of FOSS oriented developers who chafed at
Canonical's CLA licensing modification. No, I'm not letting that one go, it
is that big a deal: especially for Debian's stances on Software licensing.

Are such statements to be an understanding or equivalency as a statement
that systemd is a perfect software solution? *NO*.  Nobody here on Debian
even got close to suggesting such a thing. The closest anybody here on
these mailing lists got were statements that as of right now, *systemd is
better than SysVInit on Linux.*

Adopting systemd does not, in any way shape, form, idea, concept,
conclusion, thought, etc. etc. etc. prevent, pervert, divert, etc. etc.
etc. the goal of a computationally stable, bug-free, and flexible operating
system.

So do this, and other mailing lists a favor, knock off the Fear,
Uncertainty, and Doubt.  if you have the coding chops to actually comment
on systemd's capabilities and features; or lack-thereof; at a code level
rather than just at a Moronix Level, you'd probably be better off diving in
and fixing bugs yourself.


On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 9:06 PM, Tony Thedford <t...@accesslab.com> wrote:

> Putting the "systemd" issue on bugs.debian.org is a bit ridiculous I
> would say! As to why there are developers within Debian who are hellbent on
> turning Debian into buggy desktop software rather than keeping with the
> universal operating system directive.. I will never know! Debian is a major
> force in global server software and therefore must remain extremely stable,
> bug-free, and flexible.. all of which systemd/gnome crapware nullifies!
>
>
>
> --
> Tony Thedford
> Access Technologies
> 850 Belt Line Rd
> Garland, TX 75040
> Phone: 972.414.8356
> Email: t...@accesslab.com
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
> listmas...@lists.debian.org
> Archive: http://lists.debian.org/530411b8.7060...@accesslab.com
>
>


-- 
Jason Frothingham.
http://www.linux-guides.com
http://http://forum.mepiscommunity.org/
http://www.mepis.org
http://www.gamenikkiinexile.com
http://gplus.to/JeSaist

Reply via email to