1 |
On Sun, 26 May 2013 00:14:36 +0800 |
2 |
Ben de Groot <yngwin@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
|
4 |
> I'm taking this from https://bugs.gentoo.org/412697 to the dev mailing |
5 |
> list, since this discussion doesn't really belong on bugzilla. |
6 |
|
7 |
Since Bugzilla is down at the moment and it seems not to be mentioned |
8 |
anywhere in the mail, the package is x11-misc/lightdm. |
9 |
|
10 |
> Some background copied from the bug report: |
11 |
> |
12 |
> (In reply to comment #21) |
13 |
> > (In reply to comment #19) |
14 |
> > > WTF man? No, we do not _need_ to add support for an alternative init system |
15 |
> > > that is so aggressively opposed to what we stand for. But since you pushed |
16 |
> > > this change through against my wishes, I will remove myself as maintainer of |
17 |
> > > this package. |
18 |
> > You seem to have ignored all the discussions in -dev where it was agreed to |
19 |
> > install systemd files without even a useflag. |
20 |
> |
21 |
> I haven't ignored the discussion. We agreed to install systemd files |
22 |
> IF they are shipped by upstream. |
23 |
|
24 |
Where? I don't even think I've seen a single statement like this on |
25 |
the late threads. |
26 |
|
27 |
> > So really, if you disagree |
28 |
> > this is your problem since the community agreed to do it. |
29 |
> |
30 |
> Unless I am mistaken, we did NOT agree anywhere that Gentoo |
31 |
> maintainers MUST add systemd support when upstream does not ship such |
32 |
> files. |
33 |
|
34 |
We did agree that Gentoo maintainers are not supposed to work on |
35 |
enabling systemd support if they don't want to. On the other hand, we |
36 |
also agreed that they shouldn't refuse unit files if anyone else |
37 |
does the work for them. |
38 |
|
39 |
> > It is also NOT documented anywhere that Gentoo supports *ONLY* openrc. |
40 |
> > Just grep for "systemd_dounit" in the tree and see how many pakcages do that. |
41 |
> |
42 |
> So? That does not mean that as package maintainer I have to accept a |
43 |
> patch to support a non-default init system. Some maintainers may |
44 |
> choose to do so, others may choose not to. |
45 |
|
46 |
I'm afraid you're using the word 'patch' incorrectly here. If it was |
47 |
about a patch, I would agree with you. A patch -- something that |
48 |
actually modifies package sources or files currently installed by |
49 |
package. A patch that could mean that our package diverges from |
50 |
upstream or introduces new bugs for existing users. |
51 |
|
52 |
A unit file is *not* a patch. It's a file. A file that is incorporated |
53 |
into the package without modifying its existing contents or behavior |
54 |
on non-systemd systems. It's not something that could really cause |
55 |
problems for OpenRC users. |
56 |
|
57 |
> > It is very sad to be threatened over and over. If I do something then X |
58 |
> > people will be unhappy. If I do it Y people will be unhappy. So in this case |
59 |
> > I did what we agreed to do in the mailing list. |
60 |
> |
61 |
> We did not agree on this. Package maintainers may do as they wish for |
62 |
> their own packages. |
63 |
|
64 |
Package maintainers are to respect other developers, teams and users. |
65 |
While their wishes are important, Gentoo rules and policies are even |
66 |
more important. Much like quite a consistent experience for users. |
67 |
|
68 |
> The whole paragraph on that page says: "Gentoo is a free operating |
69 |
> system based on either Linux or FreeBSD that can be automatically |
70 |
> optimized and customized for just about any application or need. |
71 |
> Extreme configurability, performance and a top-notch user and |
72 |
> developer community are all hallmarks of the Gentoo experience. " |
73 |
> |
74 |
> Systemd is diametrically opposed to the FreeBSD, customization, |
75 |
> extreme configurability, and top-notch developer community aspects of |
76 |
> that. Systemd upstream developers have made it abundantly clear they |
77 |
> are not interested in working with Gentoo developers to see to the |
78 |
> needs of source-based distros. They stand for vertical integration |
79 |
> instead of customization and configurability. |
80 |
> |
81 |
> And you misunderstood: it is systemd that is aggressively opposed to |
82 |
> Gentoo. But apparently that doesn't bother some of our developers and |
83 |
> Gentoo is becoming more and more welcoming to it. |
84 |
|
85 |
Protecting freedom through taking away the freedom of using systemd? |
86 |
Makes sense really. |
87 |
|
88 |
> > > But since you pushed this change through against my wishes, I will remove myself as maintainer of this package. |
89 |
> > |
90 |
> > If having systemd@g.o (or any other alternative init system, or any other |
91 |
> > developer permitted by them or a higher instance) add just a few characters |
92 |
> > you never need to touch and changing an unit file you don't want is too |
93 |
> > much, then you're just stepping away from the collaborative effort that |
94 |
> > pursues the goal as stated on the about page of Gentoo; we're all in this |
95 |
> > together, don't make hate tear you apart. |
96 |
> |
97 |
> I am making a stand for what I believe in. That is not hate. I simply |
98 |
> think that systemd is a bad idea. But if others want to make it work |
99 |
> on Gentoo, that is their time to waste. |
100 |
|
101 |
Gentoo is not about making stands or running vendettas. 'Sorry, you |
102 |
have to use Ubuntu because we support the freedom of letting our |
103 |
developers make stands against X'. |
104 |
|
105 |
And yet *the others* have actually wasted their time to make it work. |
106 |
And now you're angry at them for it. And actually wasting people's time |
107 |
by reviving the same topic. Though you should expect that at this point |
108 |
most of the developers will simply ignore the topic. |
109 |
|
110 |
> > Are you going to stop maintaining |
111 |
> > any package alternative init system maintainers and users come nag you on? :( |
112 |
> |
113 |
> That is not what this is about. I will simply do the same as I already |
114 |
> did on this bug: refer users to upstream. |
115 |
> |
116 |
> But if a co-maintainer pushes through a change that I oppose, then |
117 |
> working together becomes quite difficult. In this case I opted to give |
118 |
> up maintainership. |
119 |
|
120 |
Yet another stand. No offense but I'm afraid it's quite childish of you. |
121 |
I don't understand why you're so proud of it. It's a bit like 'Gentoo |
122 |
will play as I like. If it doesn't, then I will play against Gentoo. |
123 |
And if that doesn't help, I will resent and slam the door, and then |
124 |
write to ml about it.' |
125 |
|
126 |
-- |
127 |
Best regards, |
128 |
Michał Górny |