1 |
On Sun, 26 May 2013 15:23:44 +0800 |
2 |
Ben de Groot <yngwin@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
|
4 |
> On 26 May 2013 00:48, Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
5 |
> > On the other hand, we |
6 |
> > also agreed that they shouldn't refuse unit files if anyone else |
7 |
> > does the work for them. |
8 |
> |
9 |
> Where is this policy documented? |
10 |
|
11 |
Nowhere, I think. I've seen it coming in the late thread, looked common |
12 |
sense enough to me. |
13 |
|
14 |
If it is to be documented, I think we should document it in a more |
15 |
general fashion. To cover all stuff like completions, logrotate and so |
16 |
on. |
17 |
|
18 |
> >> [...] |
19 |
> >> And you misunderstood: it is systemd that is aggressively opposed to |
20 |
> >> Gentoo. But apparently that doesn't bother some of our developers and |
21 |
> >> Gentoo is becoming more and more welcoming to it. |
22 |
> > |
23 |
> > Protecting freedom through taking away the freedom of using systemd? |
24 |
> > Makes sense really. |
25 |
> |
26 |
> That would be similar to the way the GPL protects software freedom. |
27 |
> Does that not make sense to you either? |
28 |
|
29 |
No. The initial version of that response even used 'FSF' but I've |
30 |
decided not to flame it. |
31 |
|
32 |
> But it isn't even like that. I'm not taking away anyone's freedom to |
33 |
> use systemd. You can do so if you wish. You can add unit files to your |
34 |
> system by yourself, or use an overlay. There are various ways this |
35 |
> could be realized even within Gentoo. |
36 |
|
37 |
You know how fragile that is, don't you? |
38 |
|
39 |
> But you seem to dismiss all of those, and will only be happy by |
40 |
> forcing maintainers to add support to packages they maintain, even if |
41 |
> they believe it is a bad idea. |
42 |
|
43 |
Do I? As far as I'm concerned, I always kindly asked on IRC or opened |
44 |
bugs for it. |
45 |
|
46 |
-- |
47 |
Best regards, |
48 |
Michał Górny |