Re: [gentoo-dev] udev-ng? (Was: Summary Council meeting Tuesday 13 November 2012)

[Greg KH <gregkh@gentoo.org>]

On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 11:02:19PM -0800, Alec Warner wrote:
> 1) systemd-udev will require systemd. Stated by the systemd
> maintainers themselves as a thing they want to do in the future. Some
> users don't want to use systemd. We could go into detail as to why;
> but I think that is not as important as one may think. The point is
> that the desire is there, and thusly there are users who want to make
> other systems (namely openrc) work.
> 
> People like openrc. My VMs for instance, boot reasonably quickly.
> Booting 5 seconds faster may be super duper, but not at the cost of an
> existing reliable solution.

So is this the goal?  Great, someone say that then, that's all I'm
asking for here.

> > That's wonderful, seriously.  But why is this suddenly an official
> > Gentoo project?  When did that happen, and why?  Why not just do a
> > "normal" project and if it matures and is good enough, then add it to
> > the distro like all other packages are added.
> >
> > My main point here is the fact that this is now being seen as an act by
> > Gentoo, the distro / foundation.  And that happened in private, without
> > any anouncement.  Which is not good on many levels.
> 
> I'm unsure on what grounds you disapprove. People start (and abandon)
> projects often in Gentoo. Suddenly you dislike one such project and
> object to this practice? Certainly if we had to get some sort of
> Foundation consensus (for anything) nothing would happen. We can't
> even get more than 40% of foundation members to vote.

I object if this is seen as a "Gentoo blessed" fork of a community
project that is worked on by all other major Linux distros.  That is the
type of decision that can be made by the Gentoo Council, which is fine,
but it sure would be nice if it were publicly stated, instead of having
to see it on the Gentoo github site instead.

And if that is the decision of the council, I would expect the ability
to have some type of discussion about it, wouldn't you?

Also, the whole issue with the copyrights is very serious, for the
reasons I've stated before.  Don't mess with copyrights, developers, and
companies, take them very serious, as they are the basis for our
licenses.

thanks,

greg k-h