On Mon, 24.03.14 21:22, Peter Robinson (pbrobinson(a)gmail.com) wrote:
Interesting! You sent the email starting this thread a mere 4 days
ago, two of those a weekend. You've not given it a chance to even go
to FESCo meeting for discussion. Did you send it in the same way to
the rest of the distros that depend, or are soon to depend on, systemd
now.... SuSE, Arch, Debian, Ubuntu etc giving them no chance to
discuss the impact before you unceremoniously tear a feature, for
some, out?
I quickly got reports back from the other distros, and even reported it
back here...
I am not "tearing" the thing, I am just saying that I don't have the
time to work on it in the Fedora scale.
systemd is now, or soon will be, a core component of pretty much all
major and minor distributions out there and it's no longer just about
you Lennart and your thoughts of whether it's "Yuck!" or not, you are
now similar to the kernel and like the kernel you should have a proper
deprecation process that is not just what you, Kay and who ever the
main developers decide is cool or not at the time. You should give us
and distributions in general more than 4 days to deal with what lives
or not. Ultimately systemd is no longer in nappies and is all grown
up, while you are still it's father it's now a teenager and needs to
be somewhat independent of it's father, it has friends that now depend
on it and there's should be a central place where these architectural
changes and deprecation intentions are announced, discussed and in the
case of deprecation given more than 4 days before removal.
We *did* get feedback from distros first, and we provide an alternative
to use tcpwrap with systemd even further on (via tcpd), so I really
don't see what you are upset about.
Lennart
--
Lennart Poettering, Red Hat