On Mon, 24.03.14 21:22, Peter Robinson (pbrobinson@xxxxxxxxx) 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 -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
