| 1 |
On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 9:56 AM, Tom Wijsman <TomWij@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> While people can scream, complaint and rant all they want about choice; |
| 3 |
> it isn't going to happen if nobody is going to implement it, until that |
| 4 |
> happens following whatever upstream does is the only reasonable thing |
| 5 |
> to do. Or if you really want to help, help implement the choice... :) |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
++ |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
If somebody wants to do the work to create another choice and others |
| 11 |
get in their way I'm all for helping to clear the roadblocks (in a |
| 12 |
reasonable way). |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
However, just standing up and demanding choice isn't going to get |
| 15 |
anybody anywhere, especially not with me. The Gnome team isn't |
| 16 |
required to support any particular configuration. Heck, they're not |
| 17 |
even required to maintain Gnome at all (though obviously if they don't |
| 18 |
it will get treecleaned). |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Upstream Gnome has tied their fates to systemd. Patching it to enable |
| 21 |
other configs is noble, but nothing that anybody should be forced to |
| 22 |
do. If anybody wants to maintain Gnome sans systemd knock yourself |
| 23 |
out. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Rich |
Archives