On Sat, 15 Dec 2012 12:53:41 -0500
"Walter Dnes" <waltdnes@waltdnes.org> wrote:

> On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 07:21:21AM +0000, Duncan wrote
> > Walter Dnes posted on Sat, 15 Dec 2012 01:33:04 -0500 as excerpted:
> > 
> > > [Udev-systemd has] essentially announced ahead of time that most bugs
> > > from non-systemd users would be closed with WONTFIX.
> > 
> > Agreed, to this point.
> > 
> > > Actually, for political reasons, I hope that eudev does submit a bunch
> > > bugs+patches, and gets them rejected.  Then whenever anyone complains
> > > about not sharing code, show them a bunch of WONTFIX emails from
> > > systemd/udev maintainers.
> > 
> > This attitude is and the described events would be... unfortunate.
> > 
> > For the reasons you list, I don't believe people should be /surprised/ if 
> > many such bugs+patches are rejected after submission, but that wouldn't 
> > make it any less unfortunate, and IMO, hoping they DO get rejected is the 
> > wrong attitude to have.
> 
>   I should've been clearer in my email, rather than a train-of-thought
> approach...
> 
>   1) For appearance's sake and to make our position better in outsiders'
> view, I *HOPE* that eudev developers are co-operative in regards to
> sharing patches with systemd/udev.
> 
>   2) Given past history, I *EXPECT* at least some bugs to be "resolved"
> by the systemd/udev developers as WONTFIX.  It was their attitude that
> led to eudev in the first place.
> 
>   Here's a brief overview of why I think that eudev (or equivalant) is
> necessary...
> 
>   * Lennart Poettering wrote systemd
> 
>   * systemd will not run on machines with a separate /usr, and no
>     initramfs.

Waaait, what? Did something change lately or are you just repeating
the same bullshit for months?

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny