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 AAAC01387B1 for ; Wed, 8 Oct 2014 03:19:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9AD19E0B0D; Wed, 8 Oct 2014 03:19:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qc0-f169.google.com (mail-qc0-f169.google.com [209.85.216.169]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 81D52E08DF for ; Wed, 8 Oct 2014 03:19:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qc0-f169.google.com with SMTP id i8so6991891qcq.28 for ; Tue, 07 Oct 2014 20:19:28 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=IiBVkBEvGv7R8VmAHWZ23s4luznrXMOke9iE135/z6k=; b=lEKgBbBQNqKZsviRFhYHjvLh3T3LoYi17XpLhvD6QEL3jCsl7Dn+kiY1B62c1JqW1b CjkMVs1ei+a40r5i7gsFXc1ZjGq0UJqBHmwlWuW2/vBaGgZKWzkdtA1FMqXSw86NGQVy Zg12OBPur1UGGOUFrGrXPExxV4a+qc1s2IjwQl83V6DzK9QTJDQEJ3HT+xjWzxKKwXFk kXsi12KiWuBqCtzKIWqx18iXC9LE2L6AsubripjD3Vjyb6O9kE9/ngK4L+oLyR/zme/j mbwJY++Ywc84y2tJsXj2bcvs/MMbJiIasbo6TSd/Ft6v6qai6GaeimezDDynF54L4X/v yXvw== 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 X-Received: by 10.140.92.199 with SMTP id b65mr22813996qge.86.1412738368642; Tue, 07 Oct 2014 20:19:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.96.128.68 with HTTP; Tue, 7 Oct 2014 20:19:28 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20140923105558.eaed8b57d00ddd92818cec55@comcast.net> <20140924125822.d8e095ebc723398a31190a00@comcast.net> <20141007204358.GA29518@crud> <543452F8.4010507@gmail.com> <20141007211907.GA31440@crud> <20141007211550.9c25a3ca13e7b989dfaec325@comcast.net> Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2014 23:19:28 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-amd64] Re: Boycott Systemd From: Harry Holt To: gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1139bdae9fa7080504e0c816 X-Archives-Salt: 36e2017a-c396-42aa-a4a7-b11bfa1f25e1 X-Archives-Hash: 04bcceee83aef28574efe0b6cc5c763a --001a1139bdae9fa7080504e0c816 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 10:28 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: > On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 9:15 PM, Frank Peters > wrote: > > > > FOSS developers have to maintain an awareness that there is no One True > > Way. A computer has always been and always will be a general purpose > machine. > > Therefore, the only rational philosophy for OS development is for an OS > > to empower the user to apply this generality for his own needs. > > > > You're basically arguing that if somebody putting together an OS has a > working solution for something, they should spend just as much effort > maintaining 3 other solutions for that something, and ensure that none > of the solutions becomes any better than the others. OpenRC and > Portage should work just as well with only csh installed as it does > with bash installed, etc. > No. Just no. If somebody is putting together an OS, they maintain the interfaces / APIs that applications on top would use. That's all. If one solution for, say, package managers or daemon startup works better than another, so be it. It's not the responsibility of the Kernel / OS developer, unless some application reveals a bug that others do not. Other than that, pick the package manager / initializer / etc. that works best for YOU. > > That just isn't realistic. The above scenario is ABSOLUTELY realistic, and the way it should work. The straw man you've created above, not so much. But it's just a straw man. > Most distros would rather support 47 > features that users want, and not 3 features implemented 5 different > ways each in a manner that is completely interchangeable. If a distro > did things the way you wanted, very few would bother to use it, and > likely fewer would bother to maintain it. > But isn't that the point of Gentoo in the first place? You're selecting packages for various functions that are typically source compatible, and you compile them yourself. How many text editors can you choose from? How many cron implementations? How many development languages and libraries? How many email servers and clients? What would happen if the maintainers decided Gentoo should only support one desktop environment, one shell, one option for everything? Would emacs users look elsewhere because only VI is available in Portage? I suspect so. The beauty of Gentoo is that even options not available from official sources can be integrated with either an overlay, your own ebuild, or even just building from source. > You'll always have alternative solutions in FOSS because volunteers > will work on things that interest them. Even after 99% of everything > supports systemd exclusively you'll still find people writing sysvinit > implementations from scratch in Ruby, just for the fun of it. > However, you'll never find those alternative solutions receiving > mainstream support, unless one actually tips the scale to the point > where it is considered an equal. Heck, look at postgres - most would > say that it is superior to mysql in many ways and yet many packages > still don't support it. > Ah - but au contraire. For that type of thing, it is very rare that any application that needs a relational database can't be plugged into postgresql through some mechanism or another. Sure, server-specific support packages don't (phpmyadmin won't work with it any more than pgAdmin will work with MySQL), but out side of that, you will find very few applications that have a hard dependency on a specific relational database. That's the kind of thing that Oracle does. Even though they now own MySQL, you still can't run Oracle's PeopleSoft on top of it - you need Oracle 11g or whatever. > Nothing is preventing you from starting a "Foundation for Redundant > Solutions" - with the express aim of maintaining all the stuff nobody > uses any longer. I can't imagine you'll get a lot of donations - even > if people might agree with you philosophically at some level, they're > going to want to spend their money investing in stuff they actually > use. > Before all these deep dependencies on borked does-it-all-but-nothing-well solutions like Pulse Audio and systemd came along, we used to call that Foundation "The Open Source Community". > > -- > Rich > > Harry Holt, PMP Cyber Architect Social Media Strategist --001a1139bdae9fa7080504e0c816 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 10:28 PM, Rich Freema= n <rich0@gentoo.org> wrote:
On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 9:15 PM, Frank = Peters <frank.peters@comcast= .net> wrote:
>
> FOSS developers have to maintain an awareness that there is no One Tru= e
> Way.=A0 A computer has always been and always will be a general purpos= e machine.
> Therefore, the only rational philosophy for OS development is for an O= S
> to empower the user to apply this generality for his own needs.
>

You're basically arguing that if somebody putting together an OS= has a
working solution for something, they should spend just as much effort
maintaining 3 other solutions for that something, and ensure that none
of the solutions becomes any better than the others.=A0 OpenRC and
Portage should work just as well with only csh installed as it does
with bash installed, etc.

No.=A0 Just n= o.=A0 If somebody is putting together an OS, they maintain the interfaces /= APIs that applications on top would use.=A0 That's all.=A0 If one solu= tion for, say, package managers or daemon startup works better than another= , so be it.=A0 It's not the responsibility of the Kernel / OS developer= , unless some application reveals a bug that others do not.=A0 Other than t= hat, pick the package manager / initializer / etc. that works best for YOU.= =A0

That just isn't realistic.

The above sc= enario is ABSOLUTELY realistic, and the way it should work.=A0 The straw ma= n you've created above, not so much.=A0 But it's just a straw man.<= br>=A0
=A0 Most = distros would rather support 47
features that users want, and not 3 features implemented 5 different
ways each in a manner that is completely interchangeable.=A0 If a distro did things the way you wanted, very few would bother to use it, and
likely fewer would bother to maintain it.

But isn't that the point of Gentoo in the first place?=A0 You're= selecting packages for various functions that are typically source compati= ble, and you compile them yourself.=A0 How many text editors can you choose= from?=A0 How many cron implementations?=A0 How many development languages = and libraries? =A0 How many email servers and clients?=A0 What would happen= if the maintainers decided Gentoo should only support one desktop environm= ent, one shell, one option for everything?=A0 Would emacs users look elsewh= ere because only VI is available in Portage?=A0 I suspect so.

=
The beauty of Gentoo is that even options not available from official = sources can be integrated with either an overlay, your own ebuild, or even = just building from source.=A0


You'll always have alternative solutions in FOSS because volunteers
will work on things that interest them.=A0 Even after 99% of everything
supports systemd exclusively you'll still find people writing sysvinit<= br> implementations from scratch in Ruby, just for the fun of it.
However, you'll never find those alternative solutions receiving
mainstream support, unless one actually tips the scale to the point
where it is considered an equal.=A0 Heck, look at postgres - most would
say that it is superior to mysql in many ways and yet many packages
still don't support it.

Ah - but au= contraire. For that type of thing, it is very rare that any application th= at needs a relational database can't be plugged into postgresql through= some mechanism or another.=A0 Sure, server-specific support packages don&#= 39;t (phpmyadmin won't work with it any more than pgAdmin will work wit= h MySQL), but out side of that, you will find very few applications that ha= ve a hard dependency on a specific relational database.=A0 That's the k= ind of thing that Oracle does.=A0 Even though they now own MySQL, you still= can't run Oracle's PeopleSoft on top of it - you need Oracle 11g o= r whatever.


Nothing is preventing you from starting a "Foundation for Redundant Solutions" - with the express aim of maintaining all the stuff nobody<= br> uses any longer.=A0 I can't imagine you'll get a lot of donations -= even
if people might agree with you philosophically at some level, they're going to want to spend their money investing in stuff they actually
use.

Before all these deep dependencies= on borked does-it-all-but-nothing-well solutions like Pulse Audio and syst= emd came along, we used to call that Foundation "The Open Source Commu= nity".=A0
=A0

--
Rich



Harry Holt, PMP
Cyber Architect=
Social Media Strategist

--001a1139bdae9fa7080504e0c816--