[systemd-devel] What I think is really wrong with systemd

[Dimitri John Ledkov]

On 16 September 2015 at 16:52, Kok, Auke-jan H <auke-jan.h.kok at intel.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 8:38 AM, Reindl Harald <h.reindl at thelounge.net> wrote:
>> Am 16.09.2015 um 17:13 schrieb Ahmed S. Darwish:
>>>
>>> Not to mention that the same rolling-release model was adopted by
>>> the kernel long time ago for similar reasons and much more ;-)
>>
>> that is *not* true and won't become true by repeat it
>>
>> https://www.kernel.org/
>>
>> mainline:       4.2             2015-08-30
>> stable:         4.1.7           2015-09-13
>> longterm:       3.18.21         2015-08-31
>>
>> only systemd upstream has from the core component a "that is the new version
>> with no major/minor" attitude and the kernel is the very last project to
>> compare given "longterm: 2.6.32.67 2015-06-03"
>
> nonsense. Only one of those three mentioned is actually "the linux
> kernel". The other two are independently running forks that "the linux
> kernel" maintainer does not maintain.
>
> So, he's actually entirely correct to paraphrase that the linux kernel
> community is using a rolling release model. The fact that individuals
> make "respins" that follow a non-rolling release model does not
> diminish the truth of that in any way possible.
>

To further resonate that. Just like with kernel, every vendor make
their own longterm maintenance thing of systemd.
Look at Centos vs Debian kernel, they are widely different, even if
released from same series or at the same time.
Ditto systemd, integration done in Debian, Ubuntu, openSUSE, Fedora
are all different as well.

To me this all looks like comparing kettle and pots. With calling
systemd black in comparison to the kernel.

-- 
Regards,

Dimitri.
100 sleeps till Christmas

https://clearlinux.org
Open Source Technology Center
Intel Corporation (UK) Ltd. - Co. Reg. #1134945 - Pipers Way, Swindon SN3 1RJ.