1 |
I'm taking this from https://bugs.gentoo.org/412697 to the dev mailing |
2 |
list, since this discussion doesn't really belong on bugzilla. |
3 |
|
4 |
Some background copied from the bug report: |
5 |
|
6 |
(In reply to comment #21) |
7 |
> (In reply to comment #19) |
8 |
> > (In reply to comment #17) |
9 |
> > > (In reply to comment #15) |
10 |
> > > > (In reply to comment #14) |
11 |
> > > > > I believe it is time to reconsider this now that systemd support is spread |
12 |
> > > > > all over the tree. |
13 |
> > > > |
14 |
> > > > I don't think so. If upstream ships it, we will install it. Otherwise we |
15 |
> > > > don't. Most Gentoo devs (as well as users) do not use systemd, nor have it |
16 |
> > > > installed. I don't think it can be expected of us to test and maintain |
17 |
> > > > systemd related patches. |
18 |
> > > |
19 |
> > > I expect this to change in the future. We can't keep denying that a new init |
20 |
> > > system exists and we need to at least provide a limited support for it (even |
21 |
> > > though we can't test it ourselves). |
22 |
> > |
23 |
> > WTF man? No, we do not _need_ to add support for an alternative init system |
24 |
> > that is so aggressively opposed to what we stand for. But since you pushed |
25 |
> > this change through against my wishes, I will remove myself as maintainer of |
26 |
> > this package. |
27 |
> You seem to have ignored all the discussions in -dev where it was agreed to |
28 |
> install systemd files without even a useflag. |
29 |
|
30 |
I haven't ignored the discussion. We agreed to install systemd files |
31 |
IF they are shipped by upstream. |
32 |
|
33 |
> So really, if you disagree |
34 |
> this is your problem since the community agreed to do it. |
35 |
|
36 |
Unless I am mistaken, we did NOT agree anywhere that Gentoo |
37 |
maintainers MUST add systemd support when upstream does not ship such |
38 |
files. |
39 |
|
40 |
And even if a few vocal members want that, that does not constitute |
41 |
community agreement. As far as I'm concerned, if it is not in the |
42 |
devmanual, or a council decision, it is not official policy. In that |
43 |
case individual package maintainers can do as they wish. |
44 |
|
45 |
> It is also NOT documented anywhere that Gentoo supports *ONLY* openrc. |
46 |
> Just grep for "systemd_dounit" in the tree and see how many pakcages do that. |
47 |
|
48 |
So? That does not mean that as package maintainer I have to accept a |
49 |
patch to support a non-default init system. Some maintainers may |
50 |
choose to do so, others may choose not to. |
51 |
|
52 |
> It is very sad to be threatened over and over. If I do something then X |
53 |
> people will be unhappy. If I do it Y people will be unhappy. So in this case |
54 |
> I did what we agreed to do in the mailing list. |
55 |
|
56 |
We did not agree on this. Package maintainers may do as they wish for |
57 |
their own packages. |
58 |
|
59 |
I already expressed my opinion twice in that bug report: if upstream |
60 |
ships a systemd unit file, we will let the ebuild install it. But we |
61 |
do not have to add a patch to enable systemd support where upstream |
62 |
does not ship it. |
63 |
|
64 |
Also, I am not "threatening" anyone. But if you so clearly disregard |
65 |
my opinion as co-maintainer, then I see no way we can work together on |
66 |
this. |
67 |
|
68 |
> You will soon realize that your stance against systemd will make you |
69 |
> disagree with more developers in the imminent future. |
70 |
|
71 |
That may be the case, but as long as OpenRC is Gentoo's default, and |
72 |
we are not forced to add support for systemd where upstream does not, |
73 |
then we can all continue on our merry way. |
74 |
|
75 |
It is in the nature of a big open source project like Gentoo that |
76 |
there will be disagreements. But we can agree to respectfully disagree |
77 |
and work out some policies that are acceptable for people with |
78 |
different opinions. |
79 |
|
80 |
|
81 |
(In reply to comment #22) |
82 |
> (In reply to comment #19) |
83 |
> > WTF man? No, we do not _need_ to add support for an alternative init system |
84 |
> > that is so aggressively opposed to what we stand for. |
85 |
> |
86 |
> Eh... |
87 |
> |
88 |
> 1) Who is "we"? |
89 |
> |
90 |
> 2) What exactly does this "we" people stand for? |
91 |
> |
92 |
> 3) Why does "we" stand aggressively opposed to an alternative init system? |
93 |
> |
94 |
> If you meant Gentoo, it stands for "... just about any application or need." |
95 |
> [1] and I don't see why it would be aggressively opposed to an alternative |
96 |
> init system which some of our users are experiencing a benefit from; apart |
97 |
> from a rather small group of people that decide to behave strongly opposed |
98 |
> to it. |
99 |
|
100 |
The whole paragraph on that page says: "Gentoo is a free operating |
101 |
system based on either Linux or FreeBSD that can be automatically |
102 |
optimized and customized for just about any application or need. |
103 |
Extreme configurability, performance and a top-notch user and |
104 |
developer community are all hallmarks of the Gentoo experience. " |
105 |
|
106 |
Systemd is diametrically opposed to the FreeBSD, customization, |
107 |
extreme configurability, and top-notch developer community aspects of |
108 |
that. Systemd upstream developers have made it abundantly clear they |
109 |
are not interested in working with Gentoo developers to see to the |
110 |
needs of source-based distros. They stand for vertical integration |
111 |
instead of customization and configurability. |
112 |
|
113 |
And you misunderstood: it is systemd that is aggressively opposed to |
114 |
Gentoo. But apparently that doesn't bother some of our developers and |
115 |
Gentoo is becoming more and more welcoming to it. |
116 |
|
117 |
> > But since you pushed this change through against my wishes, I will remove myself as maintainer of this package. |
118 |
> |
119 |
> If having systemd@g.o (or any other alternative init system, or any other |
120 |
> developer permitted by them or a higher instance) add just a few characters |
121 |
> you never need to touch and changing an unit file you don't want is too |
122 |
> much, then you're just stepping away from the collaborative effort that |
123 |
> pursues the goal as stated on the about page of Gentoo; we're all in this |
124 |
> together, don't make hate tear you apart. |
125 |
|
126 |
I am making a stand for what I believe in. That is not hate. I simply |
127 |
think that systemd is a bad idea. But if others want to make it work |
128 |
on Gentoo, that is their time to waste. |
129 |
|
130 |
For my part, I simply wish to not be forced to add support for it in |
131 |
packages I maintain. |
132 |
|
133 |
> Are you going to stop maintaining |
134 |
> any package alternative init system maintainers and users come nag you on? :( |
135 |
|
136 |
That is not what this is about. I will simply do the same as I already |
137 |
did on this bug: refer users to upstream. |
138 |
|
139 |
But if a co-maintainer pushes through a change that I oppose, then |
140 |
working together becomes quite difficult. In this case I opted to give |
141 |
up maintainership. |
142 |
|
143 |
> [1]: http://www.gentoo.org/main/en/about.xml |
144 |
> |
145 |
> Hope you would reconsider, it isn't hard to CC systemd@g.o and let them add |
146 |
> or change characters that don't stand in your way; in fact, when I'm bug |
147 |
> wrangling I've started CC-ing them on any new "systemd unit request" bugs |
148 |
> such they can help if the maintainer does not have knowledge in the area. |
149 |
|
150 |
I don't want to do that. And as long as I am not forced to do so, I |
151 |
will maintain the packages I maintain as I see fit. |
152 |
|
153 |
> Similarly, I expect in the near future that OpenRC mantainers (and any other |
154 |
> alternative init system maintainers) will do the same; because really, even |
155 |
> some of our systemd developers are starting to forget how init files were |
156 |
> implemented, nor are they able to easily test them. |
157 |
> |
158 |
> At least not until we get eselect init sorted out... :) |
159 |
|
160 |
-- |
161 |
Cheers, |
162 |
|
163 |
Ben | yngwin |
164 |
Gentoo developer |