"Andrej N. Gritsenko" writes:
> Uoti Urpala has written on Friday, 30 November, at 1:00:
>> I think there's already enough evidence to show that systemd is clearly
>> the best choice. How much more would you expect to have before it would
>> not be "premature" any more?
> I should thank you all, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz, and Uoti Urpala. I
> was wondered before if I should give systemd a try. Thank you very much,
> you've convinced me and now I know - I never ever have to give it even a
> small chance on any of my Debian systems.
So, I just laid into Uoti about this, and I should probably be symmetric.
This isn't useful *either*. The whole point is that *we don't need to
decide this right now*.
The people who repeatedly advocate systemd on debian-devel are not
representative of the whole development community. I suspect most of them
aren't even *part* of the systemd development community. Rather, this is
all further sign of a particular social problem in free software, namely
the tendency to attach oneself to projects (whether that be vim vs. Emacs,
GNOME vs. KDE, or systemd vs. upstart) as if they were sports teams, and
then start behaving with all the public composure and mutual understanding
of drunk football fans.
Let's try to avoid that on *all* sides. It's just software. And software
changes over time, and sometimes becomes much better (or much worse) than
it is right now. It also forks and remerges, and the development
community often changes radically. See, for example, glibc.
This is, btw, *exactly* why I personally tend to switch desktop
environments every couple of years. It's a lot easier to not villify a
whole project when one has used it for a bit and can see that it has
pluses and minuses, just like everything else.
Russ Allbery ([email protected]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>