Slash Boxes

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Wednesday November 19 2014, @11:25AM   Printer-friendly
from the I-hope-we-don't-regret-this dept.

Ian Jackson's general resolution to prevent init system coupling has failed to pass, the majority vote deciding that the resolution is unnecessary. This means that not only will Debian's default init be systemd, but packages will not be required to support other init systems. Presumably, this means that using other init systems on Debian (without using systemd as a base) will not be possible without major workarounds, or possibly at all. It also leaves the future of Debian projects such as kFreeBSD unclear, as systemd is linux specific.

The vote results can be found here

The winners are:

Option 4 "General Resolution is not required"

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 20 2014, @03:29PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 20 2014, @03:29PM (#118131)

    You can have a good architecture and a bad API

    I see what you are saying. But that still just does not seem right. Jamming things thru the CLI or thru stdin just seem wrong to me. They are very useful tools but it seems fraught and easy to create poor API.

    I am a big believer of datastructs first. If you design your data properly the API usually comes out of it quite cleanly. To your architecture point. Yet the way data is moved around seems clunky to me for some reason. I am not saying it is bad. It just seems weird and not natural.

    I cant put my finger on it. To use a quote from the matrix 'it is like a splinter in my mind'. It is like we are using the wrong interface for data movement. We are overloading meaning which creates confusion. Until something better comes along I will continue to use the crap out of it :)

    It's hard to fix a bad architecture.
    I agree... Which is why I am calling systemd a missed opportunity. It was an opportunity to remove one thing I see as very clunky in the 'distro wars'. The startup process. Each distro basically had their own versions of these scripts. Lots of redundant work just for the sake of being 'different'. Not necessarily better/worse, just different. It is one of the reasons many blew up on the idea. As it is part of the identity of the distro they picked. The systemd guys however cant seem to go back and fix what they have and are playing with polishing the brass on the rails of the titanic. They have not created a consistent interface, they 'grew one' then added in some weeds. If they get their interface right the other parts would fall naturally out of it and they would not have tons of work ahead of them. They could then go on and fix/create other things instead of farting around with how the system boots up. Which frankly is a minor part of my computer usage (at least it better be).