Re:Rethinking the D-Bus Message Bus
by acdha on Wednesday August 23, 2017 @03:28PM
(#15084359)
Your first sentence is directly contradicted by the second and certainly doesn't fit the history of the distributions. Debian, et al. have a long history of not following Red Hat when they see value – e.g. think of the patches which Debian developers maintain to make configuration easier and safer compared to Red Hat — and reason why they couldn't have done the same here other than that the people who actually do the work didn't think it was worthwhile.
It's simply disingenuous to describe Red Hat contributing a lot of engineering time for free as “hammering it down to everybody's throats”, any more than Linux was hammered down our throats over Hurd. I don't think systemd is perfect but I think anyone's standing to complain about open source software is bounded by your willingness to commit to supporting alternatives.
(And, lest you think I'm some sort of die-hard Red Hat fanboy I should note that I started using Debian in the Bo/Hamm era and have never found a compelling value to using RH)
Re:Rethinking the D-Bus Message Bus
by atemerev on Wednesday August 23, 2017 @07:03PM
(#15085976)
On the contrary, I mostly use Fedora. Systemd won, it is sad, but I accepted it. However, I want to outline that the reasons for its proliferation were less than objective merit.
It's simply disingenuous to describe Red Hat contributing a lot of engineering time for free as “hammering it down to everybody's throats”, any more than Linux was hammered down our throats over Hurd. I don't think systemd is perfect but I think anyone's standing to complain about open source software is bounded by your willingness to commit to supporting alternatives.
(And, lest you think I'm some sort of die-hard Red Hat fanboy I should note that I started using Debian in the Bo/Hamm era and have never found a compelling value to using RH)