[systemd-devel] Head ups - upstream first no longer applies to the kernel.

[Jóhann B. Guðmundsson]

On 08/16/2016 02:47 PM, Greg KH wrote:

> In the meantime, to object to other developers doing work on
> systemd to test out these changes seems very odd, who are you, or me, to
> tell someone else what they can or can not do with their project?

Interesting philosophical question as to who owns the project Lennart? 
Those that contributed lines to it and if so do those contributors just 
"own" their lines ( do I own my contributed lines in the project and 
have a saying on how they are used , I dont think so ) in the codebase? 
is it the community and users surrounding it ( since without it would be 
meaningless) ? who? Questions in which people can and probably would 
debate about to death and beyond for decades.

+ This is about consistency as in about Lennart and others drawing the 
line of having code accepted upstream *before* being taken advantage of, 
used and merged into the project.
An policy I myself whole heartily agree with but at the same time they 
themselves are not following that rule which makes that policy the whole 
definition of hypocrisy does it not?

If the line has been raised from having to be accepted upstream first to 
being *preferred* being accepted upstream first than that's ok, no 
longer hypocrisy and inline with my original mail, contributors and 
downstream expectation adjusted accordingly which I would assume would 
be aligned with the kdbus experience in which years was spent in having 
that committed into the upstream kernel, integration was made into 
systemd and elsewhere, downstream *encourage* to pick it up and begin 
testing it [1] with the added load and changes ( implementing/reverting 
) in contributed/paid time that costed contributors downstream. An 
costly experience that would have never come to pass if previous rule 
that was drawed in the sand had been followed to the letter.

I personally recommend the project should stick with the original line 
drew in the sand, for the master branch and all the "experimental" stuff 
which may or may not come to pass, be kept in it's own experimental 
branch which would be the best of the both worlds I would think. 
Downstream that want stability get what they want and are less likely to 
experience any sudden *surprises* and those that want the experimental 
stuff for whatever reason like testing get what they want.


JBG

1. 
https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2015-June/033170.html