Simon Richter <s...@debian.org> writes: > Two well-known DDs chimed in in support, and all replies from DDs to > critical replies were completely dismissive of the criticism. Previous > instances of this have been similar.
> What should I tell the people who are now maintaining these packages > outside of Debian will happen if they return? As of now, I have no > answer that would not be met with "see, that is why we left." Did you see the other thread that Adrian Bunk and I were participating about viable paths forward? What you're seeing is a project which is quite patient with, and willing to support, ways to maintain a viable sysvinit infrastructure, or some replacement with a similar design goal but updated software that solves some of the newer problems. But a project that is extremely *impatient* with grandstanding nonsense that does nothing to achieve these goals and is just a troll to waste our time, energy, and good will, like trying to eliminate an inert shared library dependency or relitigate Debian's default init system discussion. Yes, this does require some navigation, and there are still raw feelings, so picking a few people to do some of the social debates who are reasonably good at it might be a good move. But you can maintain plenty of packages in Debian without participating in these debian-devel discussions at all, and I can assure you that Debian Policy is quite open to continuing to document and standardize how to build a sysvinit or similar infrastructure. There just need to be people to do the actual work, of course. It would also be nice if these folks would show a bit of basic politeness and say thank you to the systemd maintainers, who have been a big part of keeping an ecosystem alive in Debian that they don't even use, in the face of a bunch of vitriol, just because it's the right thing to do. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
