Re: Devuan

On Mon, 11 Jul 2016 17:44:28 +0200
Ivan Sergio Borgonovo <[email protected]> wrote:

> On 07/11/2016 08:34 AM, Steve Litt wrote:
> 
> > In Debian's case, they just didn't listen. They were going full
> > speed ahead into systemd, no matter what anyone said. Heck, they
> > dared us to fork them. Then they got all offended when we did. You
> > can't make this stuff up, folks.  
> 
> "Us" as in "I'm contributing lines of code" or "us" as "I'm writing
> an howto"?

Us as in everybody on Debian-User, in the 2nd half of 2014, who said
"wait a minute, I don't want systemd on my machine."

> 
> > Debian's a big project. It's very hard to fork Debian. I think the
> > fact that it's getting done, and seemingly successfully, says
> > volumes about the merit of this fork.  
> 
> You're still living in a parallel reality.

I don't know how to respond to the preceding sentence.

> There are tens of reasonably successful "forks" of Debian and many
> for reasons I find less important than providing an alternative init.

And your point is?

> 
> You keep on describing what happened as a conspiracy of dumb and evil 
> people.
> And this conspiracy has involved most of the leading distributions.

As far as the evil part, follow the money, and here's proof that Redhat
was aware of a motive for something like systemd as far back as 2006:

http://asay.blogspot.com/2006/10/interview-with-red-hat-cto-brian.html

> 
> Can you justify that other than with a surge of mad cow disease?

Asked and answered, many times, on this list.

> 
> If there is any chance that the effort put into making Debian support 
> more than one init as smoothly as possible the prerequisite is 
> developers start to respect each other work.

Nobody cares anymore about having Debian support multiple inits. Those
who cared in 2014 have moved to BSD, Void, *too, or are busy forking
Debian to support every init *except* systemd. To those fond of
interchangeable parts, Debian's just a historical curiosity.

> Infact it is gratuitous drama that is putting the relevance of this 
> project at risk.

In an earlier post, Rick defied "gratuitous" like this:

"1. Gratuitous: being without apparent reason, cause, or justification."

The reason, cause and justification for Devuan are that some people
don't want systemd on their computers, now or in the future, and don't
trust Debian to facilitate freedom from systemd as time goes on.

As far as putting the project at risk, I have no hard facts, but I
doubt whatever drama there's been is putting Devuan at risk. 


> Throwing shit around is not going to get you a good reputation among 
> upstream.

I just looked, and none of my walls have brown stains. And I am (or
was) "upstream",  thanks to VimOutliner.

> Denial is not going to get patches into Debian.

Who cares about getting patches into Debian? Certainly not I. That ship
sailed the day they voted "no need for vote" on the GR.

> And you are not helping in ANY way.

I'm helping the Devuan project in a small way, which is where the help
is needed. I've helped by writing documentation on Void Linux and
Runit. I helped when my "Manjaro Experiments" web page showed everyone
how to set up their own init, with or without their distro's
cooperation.

> 
> Not that devuan success is anywhere near the top of my priorities,
> but it looks I do care more than you.

OK.
> 
> It's time to tune your approach to the problem.
> 
OK.

SteveT

Steve Litt 
July 2016 featured book: Troubleshooting Techniques
     of the Successful Technologist
http://www.troubleshooters.com/techniques