From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 820A413838B for ; Mon, 22 Sep 2014 16:35:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1E2EAE0951; Mon, 22 Sep 2014 16:35:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from resqmta-po-09v.sys.comcast.net (resqmta-po-09v.sys.comcast.net [96.114.154.168]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7CB49E0942 for ; Mon, 22 Sep 2014 16:35:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from resomta-po-15v.sys.comcast.net ([96.114.154.239]) by resqmta-po-09v.sys.comcast.net with comcast id uGa41o0065AAYLo01Gb2nR; Mon, 22 Sep 2014 16:35:02 +0000 Received: from crud.chemoelectric.org ([66.41.30.59]) by resomta-po-15v.sys.comcast.net with comcast id uGb11o0071GXozm01Gb1um; Mon, 22 Sep 2014 16:35:02 +0000 Received: by crud.chemoelectric.org (Postfix, from userid 1501) id C91AC146021E; Mon, 22 Sep 2014 11:35:00 -0500 (CDT) Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2014 11:35:00 -0500 From: Barry Schwartz To: gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-amd64] Boycott Systemd Message-ID: <20140922163500.GA11594@crud> References: <20140921132548.d4ad54724473a2aeee688daa@comcast.net> <20140921143059.c3c16dfdeab6f65280b7caa6@comcast.net> <20140921192043.GA9652@crud> <20140921171301.5f008b3bd12c21c2f8fdd67e@comcast.net> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.22 (2013-10-16) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=comcast.net; s=q20140121; t=1411403702; bh=7AkV1h/UmnrzzYPby9c/lYwaDWlYt3QReOIo7UJkC2c=; h=Received:Received:Received:Date:From:To:Subject:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=Kh3HH0Xl3aauCDtHLkWON3Gp7A74NU1EHXVmWqRmxDYbfSRKOxHHTWn7leKgUePHd tHjpCaXO86lDy6yxS0ayima5LSFq9m/Xt9ycC2GEErncR3tC4guFfzZjW9mfuqKuFE 5xCP7uHb8phgpkFk35kdjZQ9iRL3FDy8Ue0KvPVNsQvQ71pxWtSCzJwheZkTKvI2jw usGyx8EeFMkZd4LBN/HPgCtsNPxPyCQ12OsLXw4c6MuOT6p1XBVozK8z5f3jlN5OxC L9dM1cIrAgK9mi9ORAUPjgIvhZx4xtEXjnlaQ8TdsRWeTp+2qfWoWouUU3uRhmRNpX 9uE6B0BOetz6A== X-Archives-Salt: 3dac88ae-b8ef-43a0-a158-cf489964df5c X-Archives-Hash: b74204f8e892a38a50d07346c5af9f32 Lie Ryan skribis: > Encouraging pointless differences is not supporting diversity. In > contrary, encouraging pointless differences *kills* diversity. > Diversity is a mean to the end of producing better software system, it > isn't an end of itself. If having less diversity means that I can take > my software, bring it to another totally different system, and it > works just as well as it was, then so be it. This argument has little power with the intended audience, because the software you are intent on bringing to another system is precisely the software one like myself is complaining about for its being difference-intolerant due to bad system design. We do not like it. Besides which, there _are_ other criteria by which to judge software.