| 1 |
On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 2:14 PM, Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@×××.net> wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> Joost Roeleveld posted on Sun, 18 Sep 2011 17:22:42 +0200 as excerpted: |
| 4 |
> > I don't see any added benefit from using DBUS on my servers. |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> Interesting question. I hadn't seen the suggestion until this thread, |
| 7 |
> either, and it bothered me too. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
Well, I can't really speak about the specific issue as I'm not sure what the |
| 11 |
maintainers of dbus, systemd, and udev are thinking. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
However, I can imagine that the goals of parties like Canonical and RedHat |
| 14 |
are to cut down on the number of configurations. If the server image is |
| 15 |
vastly different from the desktop image you start having to divide your |
| 16 |
resources to maintain both. If the only difference is that you install a |
| 17 |
little less stuff (or just different stuff) by default then it isn't such a |
| 18 |
big deal. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Gentoo is not immune to these pressures either. If upstream moves in one |
| 21 |
direction then it will take consistent effort just to stay still. Anytime |
| 22 |
we have six months without a dev we'll just inevitably get pulled along with |
| 23 |
upstream anyway. If people have concerns with the direction upstream is |
| 24 |
going, then they need to try to influence the upstream projects to change |
| 25 |
direction. Simply posting on this list isn't going to change udev's |
| 26 |
long-term strategy. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
Personally I feel that Gentoo is all about choice and we should continue to |
| 29 |
give our users as many choices as are practical. However, we don't have the |
| 30 |
resources of Canonical and we can't just fork upstream and take it an |
| 31 |
entirely different direction as a result. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
Rich |
Archives