Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Quick Search: in
The {pro,anti}systemd meta-kvetch.
View unanswered posts
View posts from last 24 hours

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  
This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Gentoo Forums Feedback
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
ulenrich
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 10 Oct 2010
Posts: 1168

PostPosted: Mon Mar 03, 2014 10:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

PaulBredbury wrote:
saellaven wrote:
deciding to make my system unsupported

Get out of my thread, you troll. Don't come back until you've submitted patches to optionally support your system!

Use your energy to do something useful, you damned troll :evil:

It is about an issue, where - they claim - there have been patches. But they were ignored - they say.
_________________
fun2gen2
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TomWij
Developer
Developer


Joined: 04 Jul 2012
Posts: 1551

PostPosted: Mon Mar 03, 2014 10:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

saellaven wrote:
I should have used the phrase "prior warning." Believe it or not, not every non-dev has time to participate in every mailing list all the time.


If this is a prior warning about the decision taking effect, then note that the news message has been brought out a month in advance.

If this is a prior warning for the Council meeting taking place, then users that are interested can subscribe to the gentoo-project mailing list as that is where the agenda items are called for and given to the user. Reading the agenda items, for those whom are interested; takes around a minute on a monthly basis. Linking to the previous agenda draft; you can see it is about the GPG signing GLEP, EAPI deprecation, stable keywords on testing architectures, the gtk* USE flags and affirmation of QA's decision.

I agree with you that this is indeed opt-in behavior as one needs to subscribe to receive those; the other approach could be if all teams make news everywhere when they plan to hold a meeting, though I think that will cost time from people that are uninterested and/or have no time as they now get attracted by its advertisement. As for making aware people these prior announcements takes place on the gentoo-project ML, I think to a certain extent the resources you go through when reading about contributing and/or becoming a developer cover this.

It is an interesting topic on its own where improvement is possible; just last week I found "Additionally, the council wants to put meeting summaries on Planet Gentoo and the Gentoo Forums starting with this summary." back in a meeting log summary from 2006; as the members of the Council have changed for several years, it has been forgotten as the people whom originally did that are no longer aboard and it didn't catch on (new Council members could be unaware that this was done in the past). This has been brought to their awareness; so, I hope to see this come back. Maybe this could be a good onset to get the prior announcements in an appropriate forum thread people follow as well; and if the Council forgets to do so, I might consider taking on this tank to be a messenger and forward what they post to the mailing list to such thread.

saellaven wrote:
Tom, we've had this discussion... it's the very discussion that made me determine that you don't act in good faith and you were here to troll for your ego's sake, resulting in my asking you to no longer reply to me. Perhaps if you spent more time listening and less time smiling because you see your name next to a post, you'd remember.

I'll reiterate, yet again, hoping maybe this time you'll actually listen rather than just talk circles

http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-901206.html


Okay, sorry, given it was multiple I assumed it was a different set. Reading through this, it makes sense that resorting dependencies will work; I agree with it and have yet to see a reason for the OpenRC team to reject this, I'd suggest this to be send to the OpenRC team for review. There were earlier suggestions to send this to the gentoo-dev mailing list; however, that mailing list has no governance over the OpenRC project, furthermore I think it could be met with possible resistance there. Thus I suggest to try the OpenRC team first before sending it to other developers.

In the council context, it might have served as evidence in the Council meeting; though, I wonder whether that could change the outcoming result. If we look back at the meeting summary where this was decided we see that the following statement was accepted unanimously: "Since that particular setup may already be subtly broken today depending on the installed software, Council recommends using an early boot mount mechanism, e.g. initramfs, to mount /usr if /usr is on a separate partition."

The statement has no mention of what is broken; while it can very well be fixed that particular OpenRC setup, the same might not apply to other systems. The second vote (see summary) is some sort of indication that a form of maintenance costs was brought up; this thus seems to indicate, that there is more involved than this particular setup. This can be seen in the news item: "Due to many upstream changes, properly supporting Linux systems that have /usr missing at boot time has become increasingly difficult. Despite all our efforts, it already breaks in some exotic configurations, and this trend is likely to grow worse."

Note the wording "become increasingly difficult" and "exotic configurations"; this implies that the council very well knows that it will work in general, but that it can no longer be guaranteed for every case. Granted that the council has reviewed this news item, which they did on the gentoo-dev ML; even if they didn't, you can look at this from the OpenRC's lead perspective. If he, as a lead, knows that the patch works; he must very well be concerned about other difficulties as well as exotic configurations, in this light I think we could shed more light here by asking him what those difficulties and exotic configurations are. If you want, I can dig up some clarification that I was given in the past; but it's something that's been discussed in extreme length, and thus I so far haven't spent the time reading through the entire thing to get a solid understanding of that complexity.

saellaven wrote:
per ryao's post @ Thu Nov 29, 2012 3:31 pm williamh knew about the patches. That's 8 months before he proposed removing separate /usr to the Council and almost a year before the Council voted on his proposal. During the Council's chat before the vote, he never mentioned the patches once to his fellow Council members. That suggests that he intentionally withheld that information, perhaps because he's conflicted in his role as OpenRC lead but also as a member of the systemd team, and he abused his position on the Council and the good faith of his fellow Council members to promulgate his own agenda while also holding OpenRC back.


Then I think the Council should be brought to the attention, if it can make a difference; similar to how court works, where just that small extra evidence can make the difference. It might be possible that WilliamH has put himself in a position where he tries to satisfy both OpenRC and systemd's goals; and as a consequence of that, he might act and vote in such way to not abuse an improvement of one project to cause for a regression in the other project. If this is the case, because I might be just guessing; then this agenda could follow the "freedom of choice" philosophy as an advantage, however, the agenda on the other hand keeps the experience of both projects within Gentoo from improving. That might be an interesting consideration towards the future; however, given it takes multiple people to vote I think that we'll be safe.

saellaven wrote:
Since the Council's decision, we've seen numerous problems with initramfs causing systems to not boot properly, people being forced to alter production systems to eliminate a lvm separated /usr, etc... and it all comes down to a technical limitation in systemd/udev imposed by Lennart Poettering because he didn't see any possible reason why anyone should ever need a separate /usr.

Until that point, OpenRC and even sysvinit prior to that worked fine - I've been using such a setup since the mid-late 90s. It was intentionally broken by the systemd devs and, rather than limit LP's damage to his own init system, williamh intentionally damaged any system that chose NOT to use systemd.


That is indeed a concern. Whereas I have mentioned "freedom of choice" in the previous paragraph; there's another "freedom of choice" when keeping support for a separate /usr available, which conflicts with the earlier mention of it. Put more clearly: I think that the freedom to choice between OpenRC and systemd stands orthogonal on the freedom of choice between an initramfs and non-initramfs approach to /usr; and thus, while one might fight for having a choice in the former, it'll cause side effects in the choice of the latter. It seems as if the distribution needs to take a choice in which "freedom of choice" they prefer here; with the decisions made, this has led to support more freedom of choice in the former (OpenRC / systemd) and less freedom of choice in the latter (/usr).

Now, as I seem to get a bit lost in this idea of freedom of choice; I'm going back to what I think would be a question to be raised: "Can we just support both?" To this question I think the answer is "Yes, but..."; improvements are definitely possible like for instance contacting the OpenRC lead to get the patches supported, however the "but..." part is the amount of manpower to keep it supported. While the OpenRC lead can easily do this by himself; addressing the other problems takes a lot more involvement as things are regressing, given that developers upstream are changing from what used to work.

As for the breakage, I think that needs to be addressed by contacting WilliamH and/or higher instances about this; given that this is breakage that aren't a result of the drop of support, as the drop of support itself needs to be rather addressed in a way to demonstrate that there is no need to drop the support, things can be kept working and the manpower to do so is available.

saellaven wrote:
I thought about going to the Council afterwards, but per Council policy, all votes are final...


IIRC, is that one cannot ask the Council to decide about the same motion twice; or at least, it allows the council to say "you've already asked us that, we would like to see new viewpoint, extra information, actual statistics, ..." to avoid people from putting a motion on the agenda again and again. I think it still allows others from bringing up a different motion that makes the existing motion obsolete; just like the laws we have in our daily life, I think it is possible for it to be revised.

saellaven wrote:
and why are they going to listen to me?


It's a win-win situation; in the good case you make something happen, in the bad case you get told why the Council doesn't consider it. The latter allows you to improve it and bring it forward again. And if needed, there are a lot of users in this thread that you can bring along; while maybe not everyone wants to join the mailing list or IRC, a forum poll can work. The QA team for instance has recently voted based on what users voted in a forum poll; so, this should be very possible to be done in the Gentoo Council.

Given the controversy, there will be more brought up and taken into consideration by others; there is a certain complexity to this, I think that some feedback can simply drown due to that. Even in that case, I still think that having the Council do a reconsideration by itself is an achievement; as it has brought it back to people's minds, whereas they now might assume everything to go well. A lot of developers don't visit the forums, most of them because they don't recognize its presence; that this is brought forward here on the forums is outside of their view, thus one of my thoughts is how to get more developers participating here. The forum is a valuable resource for communicating with and listening to the users.

saellaven wrote:
I get the run around from devs like you that simply set out to frustrate people into submission, devs like ssuominen* telling people that if they dare to challenge the devs, they might as well leave the Gentoo universe completely (an attitude that he also took up with the eudev gentoo devs when they dared to fork his pet project), etc. Since I started using Gentoo in 2006, there's been a subtle "devs don't care about the users" type attitude, but it's gotten REALLY prevalent over the last half a year, particularly revolving around systemd's intrusions deeper into user space and the proponents of systemd treating it as a political campaign.


This post has been typed in extreme length, reading the link provided as well as every word you type twice, checking my browser history I see that there went 90 minutes into writing this post; as you can see, I do care. There is a lack time and even position for me to accomplish much of what users would like to see; but I do listen to take this in consideration when communicating with other developers, as well as want to guide and support you when you want to make things happen.

saellaven wrote:
And, say I take it up with ComRel, why are they going to care? Who are they going to side with, some users on the forum or a handful of devs that have gotten themselves into key positions, whom they not only have to work with every day, but whom can up and change the political structure underneath them at any time (see the recent changes to QA and the fight back as the new QA team tries to impose it's will on the tree)?


They use a hands-off approach most of the times; when you would address them, they tell you to resolve it first with the instances involved and go to further instances only if needed (the users / developers themselves, if they ignore you; you can step it up to the moderators of the medium, only if they ignore you once again or you disagree with their action, you can step it up to ComRel). The forum moderators follow a similar hands-off approach.

Thank you for reading.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TomWij
Developer
Developer


Joined: 04 Jul 2012
Posts: 1551

PostPosted: Mon Mar 03, 2014 10:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

SirRobin2318 wrote:
Well yes, why not? Let the council give an official answer, and see how the community reacts. I'd rather see gentoo support multiple inits, but if that's not what they have in mind, a lot of people here would be interested to know...


Feel free to ask them your question by sending them a mail, see their project page for the address. The multiple inits is a consequence of the philosophy that Gentoo; or at the very least, we can assume it will be kept unless stated otherwise. Or, as you say; one can ask that the council give an official answer.

SirRobin2318 wrote:
I've been using gentoo for 10 years. The handbook hasn't changed, and it should have.


There might be plans to move it to the Gentoo Wiki; I've heard about this here and there, but haven't followed through on it. Other than that there are some separate installation handbook efforts on the Gentoo Wiki; though, they kind of lose the official carefully crafted and supported notion that the official handbook carries. A migration of the official handbook to the Gentoo Wiki in a way that it will be continued to be monitored to keep its quality, could yield to it be kept up-to-date; it's what I hope would happen in the longer run, as it is more handy to edit than filing bugs with patches to get changes to happen.

SirRobin2318 wrote:
What I'm trying to say is that the purpose and the functionality of these need to be documented, so users can make a choice. The way to achieve that choice should also be documented.


When we have a stage3 for each, I think this would lead to documentation on this; as when taking a look at existing documentation, I think https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Comparison_of_init_systems yield some details but doesn't go into length. I remember another article going into further length, perhaps it was on the unofficial wiki, although it mentioned less choices. If I come across it and remember this post, I might bring it up; but regardless, I agree with you that better documentation can lead to better choice. I wonder if someone with good knowledge is interested in making further improvements to this documentation.

SirRobin2318 wrote:
We would be seeing a lot less posts for help (do a search for networkmanager and see how many are due to not understanding polkit). And we would see less FUD on systemd vs openrc.


+1 It might work out well; this is kind of a similar thought to what I mentioned in another topic, that breakage shouldn't be the default (even when that default means a lack of documentation).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TomWij
Developer
Developer


Joined: 04 Jul 2012
Posts: 1551

PostPosted: Mon Mar 03, 2014 11:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

saellaven wrote:
At no point do I or most other users claim to represent Gentoo, but people posting with sigs, forum ranks or @gentoo email addresses ARE proclaiming themselves as Gentoo ambassadors, representing it on whole, even if they are only discussing their personal opinions.


Do you then proclaim to be an apprentice?

My signature is absent (given that I assume it to be embedded in posts, disallowing me from changing it), my @gentoo e-mail address is invisible; what is left is a badge, this badge I have just requested as a matter of procedure. It is there to make clear in support threads that I am posting as a developer; without the badge, it would need me to demonstrate that I am a developer. Given that nothing on my profile really does reveal that, that becomes rather problematic; I may very well be perceived as an impersonator, until they see a commit is made to the Portage tree based on the discussion. That's where I'd like to make it clear right away. That is the "positive side" of such a badge; however, as you state it, there is also the "negative side" as to be perceived as someone whom speaks in the name of Gentoo, whether that is it as a whole, its Council or its Foundation.

Consider that I was just an interested contributor a year ago, or perhaps even an user; no different from you, and that's something I would like to be seen as: just a contributor like I used to be and still am.

An analog idea is that if you walk up to a young cashier in a store and ask a question or so; then the young cashier tells you something you don't believe, or the cashier tells you something you do believe but later appears to be wrong. In both these cases you will want to inform with others, the information available in other forms as well as talk with the boss about this; because well, that young cashier really doesn't look to be representing the entire store company which has over 250 stores across several countries. Gentoo is somewhat similar; we're a bunch of projects, with a bunch of contributors in each whom come out of the community.

If you look at the opposite scenario, I could claim every Gentoo user to represent Gentoo; given that I for example do see users regularly state that it is about choice, which really does make the impression to a non-Gentoo user that it is all about choice. What will the user do before spending a ton of time installing Gentoo? Fact check with others, documentation and/or higher instances that Gentoo indeed is all about choice. The non-Gentoo user is aware that the single Gentoo user whom he/she has met may or may not represent Gentoo well; and in the event that they don't, they'll figure out soon enough as the installation and install will be different from what they are expecting it to be.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
saellaven
Guru
Guru


Joined: 23 Jul 2006
Posts: 303

PostPosted: Mon Mar 03, 2014 11:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

TomWij wrote:
saellaven wrote:
I should have used the phrase "prior warning." Believe it or not, not every non-dev has time to participate in every mailing list all the time.


If this is a prior warning about the decision taking effect, then note that the news message has been brought out a month in advance.

If this is a prior warning for the Council meeting taking place, then users that are interested can subscribe to the gentoo-project mailing list as that is where the agenda items are called for and given to the user. Reading the agenda items, for those whom are interested; takes around a minute on a monthly basis. Linking to the previous agenda draft; you can see it is about the GPG signing GLEP, EAPI deprecation, stable keywords on testing architectures, the gtk* USE flags and affirmation of QA's decision.

I agree with you that this is indeed opt-in behavior as one needs to subscribe to receive those; the other approach could be if all teams make news everywhere when they plan to hold a meeting, though I think that will cost time from people that are uninterested and/or have no time as they now get attracted by its advertisement. As for making aware people these prior announcements takes place on the gentoo-project ML, I think to a certain extent the resources you go through when reading about contributing and/or becoming a developer cover this.

It is an interesting topic on its own where improvement is possible; just last week I found "Additionally, the council wants to put meeting summaries on Planet Gentoo and the Gentoo Forums starting with this summary." back in a meeting log summary from 2006; as the members of the Council have changed for several years, it has been forgotten as the people whom originally did that are no longer aboard and it didn't catch on (new Council members could be unaware that this was done in the past). This has been brought to their awareness; so, I hope to see this come back. Maybe this could be a good onset to get the prior announcements in an appropriate forum thread people follow as well; and if the Council forgets to do so, I might consider taking on this tank to be a messenger and forward what they post to the mailing list to such thread.


The warning that things are changing in a month is too late... the decision has already been made. There's absolutely no reason why the agenda should be posted only to gentoo.project. It's fine for requests for agenda to only be asked there, but a few days before a meeting, the agenda should be posted as widely as possible so interested parties can participate before or during the meeting. There's no reason why the agenda couldn't, shouldn't or can't be posted to other lists, planet, the forum, etc.

Likewise, in the Council's decision per /usr, they decided that existing packages shouldn't be harmed, but going forward, all packages can assume that there will be no /usr, allowing a key package like util-linux to even silently break people's systems. That was a pretty weighty decision to make, given how small the net was cast for input and how little work the Council itself apparently did to investigate the possibilities, pitfalls, etc.

TomWij wrote:

saellaven wrote:
Tom, we've had this discussion... it's the very discussion that made me determine that you don't act in good faith and you were here to troll for your ego's sake, resulting in my asking you to no longer reply to me. Perhaps if you spent more time listening and less time smiling because you see your name next to a post, you'd remember.

I'll reiterate, yet again, hoping maybe this time you'll actually listen rather than just talk circles

http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-901206.html


Okay, sorry, given it was multiple I assumed it was a different set. Reading through this, it makes sense that resorting dependencies will work; I agree with it and have yet to see a reason for the OpenRC team to reject this, I'd suggest this to be send to the OpenRC team for review. There were earlier suggestions to send this to the gentoo-dev mailing list; however, that mailing list has no governance over the OpenRC project, furthermore I think it could be met with possible resistance there. Thus I suggest to try the OpenRC team first before sending it to other developers.

In the council context, it might have served as evidence in the Council meeting; though, I wonder whether that could change the outcoming result. If we look back at the meeting summary where this was decided we see that the following statement was accepted unanimously: "Since that particular setup may already be subtly broken today depending on the installed software, Council recommends using an early boot mount mechanism, e.g. initramfs, to mount /usr if /usr is on a separate partition."

The statement has no mention of what is broken; while it can very well be fixed that particular OpenRC setup, the same might not apply to other systems. The second vote (see summary) is some sort of indication that a form of maintenance costs was brought up; this thus seems to indicate, that there is more involved than this particular setup. This can be seen in the news item: "Due to many upstream changes, properly supporting Linux systems that have /usr missing at boot time has become increasingly difficult. Despite all our efforts, it already breaks in some exotic configurations, and this trend is likely to grow worse."

Note the wording "become increasingly difficult" and "exotic configurations"; this implies that the council very well knows that it will work in general, but that it can no longer be guaranteed for every case. Granted that the council has reviewed this news item, which they did on the gentoo-dev ML; even if they didn't, you can look at this from the OpenRC's lead perspective. If he, as a lead, knows that the patch works; he must very well be concerned about other difficulties as well as exotic configurations, in this light I think we could shed more light here by asking him what those difficulties and exotic configurations are. If you want, I can dig up some clarification that I was given in the past; but it's something that's been discussed in extreme length, and thus I so far haven't spent the time reading through the entire thing to get a solid understanding of that complexity.


And thus, my opinion that williamh is conflicted between his lead on OpenRC, belonging to the systemd herd and sitting on the Council. That gives him, and him alone, a LOT of sway to force his choices (thereby creating a lack of choice) on everyone else. Yes, he is more involved in the subject than maybe anyone else on the Council, so he probably knows more, but he is mired in conflicts of interest and should have recused himself.

TomWij wrote:

Then I think the Council should be brought to the attention, if it can make a difference; similar to how court works, where just that small extra evidence can make the difference. It might be possible that WilliamH has put himself in a position where he tries to satisfy both OpenRC and systemd's goals; and as a consequence of that, he might act and vote in such way to not abuse an improvement of one project to cause for a regression in the other project. If this is the case, because I might be just guessing; then this agenda could follow the "freedom of choice" philosophy as an advantage, however, the agenda on the other hand keeps the experience of both projects within Gentoo from improving. That might be an interesting consideration towards the future; however, given it takes multiple people to vote I think that we'll be safe.


Likewise, I see, per williamh's user page, he's also involved on the QA team. Just how far should a single dev's power reach? Who is there to turn to when something goes awry? QA? Well, they have to work with him every day. The Council, well, you can't appeal a decision. The Foundation (the legal entity responsible for Gentoo), well, dberkholz sits there and on the Council, where he also has to work with williamh. ComRel? Why should they be any different?

And therein the problem of all the cliques comes up when some well-connected dev decides to push an agenda. Perhaps there should be a limit to how many organization level projects one dev should be able to sit on.

TomWij wrote:

That is indeed a concern. Whereas I have mentioned "freedom of choice" in the previous paragraph; there's another "freedom of choice" when keeping support for a separate /usr available, which conflicts with the earlier mention of it. Put more clearly: I think that the freedom to choice between OpenRC and systemd stands orthogonal on the freedom of choice between an initramfs and non-initramfs approach to /usr; and thus, while one might fight for having a choice in the former, it'll cause side effects in the choice of the latter. It seems as if the distribution needs to take a choice in which "freedom of choice" they prefer here; with the decisions made, this has led to support more freedom of choice in the former (OpenRC / systemd) and less freedom of choice in the latter (/usr).

Now, as I seem to get a bit lost in this idea of freedom of choice; I'm going back to what I think would be a question to be raised: "Can we just support both?" To this question I think the answer is "Yes, but..."; improvements are definitely possible like for instance contacting the OpenRC lead to get the patches supported, however the "but..." part is the amount of manpower to keep it supported. While the OpenRC lead can easily do this by himself; addressing the other problems takes a lot more involvement as things are regressing, given that developers upstream are changing from what used to work.

As for the breakage, I think that needs to be addressed by contacting WilliamH and/or higher instances about this; given that this is breakage that aren't a result of the drop of support, as the drop of support itself needs to be rather addressed in a way to demonstrate that there is no need to drop the support, things can be kept working and the manpower to do so is available.


initramfs isn't without its own problems and I'd wager that it's still causing more breakages than a separate /usr (ignoring LP's decision to intentionally break it in his software) ever did. And given that the OpenRC lead refuses to add the patch to OpenRC, refused to disclose it to his fellow Council members, etc, what else is a mere user supposed to do but call him out? But then the dev/user divide comes in and devs come in to protect other devs - exactly as you did when you and I personally went round and round with this months ago in the thread that turned me against you because of your choice to only play word games then.

and who is higher than WilliamH? He's project lead, on the Council, on QA, etc. Who exactly do I appeal to about his misbehavior?

TomWij wrote:

saellaven wrote:
I thought about going to the Council afterwards, but per Council policy, all votes are final...


IIRC, is that one cannot ask the Council to decide about the same motion twice; or at least, it allows the council to say "you've already asked us that, we would like to see new viewpoint, extra information, actual statistics, ..." to avoid people from putting a motion on the agenda again and again. I think it still allows others from bringing up a different motion that makes the existing motion obsolete; just like the laws we have in our daily life, I think it is possible for it to be revised.


In the meantime, that's the law...

TomWij wrote:

saellaven wrote:
and why are they going to listen to me?


It's a win-win situation; in the good case you make something happen, in the bad case you get told why the Council doesn't consider it. The latter allows you to improve it and bring it forward again. And if needed, there are a lot of users in this thread that you can bring along; while maybe not everyone wants to join the mailing list or IRC, a forum poll can work. The QA team for instance has recently voted based on what users voted in a forum poll; so, this should be very possible to be done in the Gentoo Council.

Given the controversy, there will be more brought up and taken into consideration by others; there is a certain complexity to this, I think that some feedback can simply drown due to that. Even in that case, I still think that having the Council do a reconsideration by itself is an achievement; as it has brought it back to people's minds, whereas they now might assume everything to go well. A lot of developers don't visit the forums, most of them because they don't recognize its presence; that this is brought forward here on the forums is outside of their view, thus one of my thoughts is how to get more developers participating here. The forum is a valuable resource for communicating with and listening to the users.


It's not a win-win... given the past behavior of several devs, yourself included, I see it as utterly pointless. You guys will just deflect and play games until the problem goes away to protect one of your own.

Hell, I dug all of this stuff out back in October, posting stuff from the Council notes, from mailing lists, etc, only to still be called an anti-systemd, anti-redhat, anti-blah blah blah troll with no facts. The proponents of systemd will go to any extent to smother anyone that doesn't accept it as the one true way until the people that don't want systemd simply give up and let systemd win by default.

I'm so sick of the endless fighting, I've been preparing a fork of Gentoo in my spare time, specifically because eventually the systemd people will have their way, either through duplicitous behavior, like that which I believe williamh engaged in, or through an unending campaign to stifle any criticism. They've already conquered almost every other distro.

TomWij wrote:

saellaven wrote:
I get the run around from devs like you that simply set out to frustrate people into submission, devs like ssuominen* telling people that if they dare to challenge the devs, they might as well leave the Gentoo universe completely (an attitude that he also took up with the eudev gentoo devs when they dared to fork his pet project), etc. Since I started using Gentoo in 2006, there's been a subtle "devs don't care about the users" type attitude, but it's gotten REALLY prevalent over the last half a year, particularly revolving around systemd's intrusions deeper into user space and the proponents of systemd treating it as a political campaign.


This post has been typed in extreme length, reading the link provided as well as every word you type twice, checking my browser history I see that there went 90 minutes into writing this post; as you can see, I do care. There is a lack time and even position for me to accomplish much of what users would like to see; but I do listen to take this in consideration when communicating with other developers, as well as want to guide and support you when you want to make things happen.


and I appreciate it, which is why I've taken the time to reply. I believe THIS post was written in good faith versus your previous posts from our prior discussions that were not.


and just to add... at the end of the day, it's all of these political campaigns, cliques, etc within Gentoo, particularly the devs somehow believing they know better than the users, that causes me, and I'm sure others, to NOT contribute as much as we could to Gentoo. I considered becoming a dev myself but I'm not going to waste my time with all the games they like to play.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
krinn
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 02 May 2003
Posts: 4398

PostPosted: Mon Mar 03, 2014 11:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

saellaven wrote:

And thus, my opinion that williamh is conflicted between his lead on OpenRC, belonging to the systemd herd and sitting on the Council.

I agree, and anyone having such position, not pushing "himself" back because of that conflict, is abusing his position.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Naib
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 4185
Location: Removed by Neddy

PostPosted: Tue Mar 04, 2014 12:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

krinn wrote:
saellaven wrote:

And thus, my opinion that williamh is conflicted between his lead on OpenRC, belonging to the systemd herd and sitting on the Council.

I agree, and anyone having such position, not pushing "himself" back because of that conflict, is abusing his position.
Stop trying to create drama. Can you provide citation of abuse of position. Sure there is possibly a conflict of interest going on, but that is upto Gentoo as a whole and the council to decide if it is ok, permissible or whether something should be done.
_________________
A free press is the unsleeping guardian of every other right that free men prize; it is the most dangerous foe of tyranny. Where men have the habit of liberty, the Press will continue to be the vigilant guardian of the rights of the ordinary citizen.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
krinn
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 02 May 2003
Posts: 4398

PostPosted: Tue Mar 04, 2014 1:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Naib wrote:
krinn wrote:
saellaven wrote:

And thus, my opinion that williamh is conflicted between his lead on OpenRC, belonging to the systemd herd and sitting on the Council.

I agree, and anyone having such position, not pushing "himself" back because of that conflict, is abusing his position.
Stop trying to create drama. Can you provide citation of abuse of position. Sure there is possibly a conflict of interest going on, but that is upto Gentoo as a whole and the council to decide if it is ok, permissible or whether something should be done.

Sure: me & you going to court because of a problem :
- if my wife is the judge, she's in conflict of interrest.
- if my wife doesn't get herself out of it, she's abusing her position.
You don't need to wait my wife to tell if you or me is right, as long as there will be doubt because of the conflict itself.
Clearer ?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Naib
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 4185
Location: Removed by Neddy

PostPosted: Tue Mar 04, 2014 1:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

then you have not understood what you wrote and what I wrote.

You are hte one stating he is abusing his position, so show it.
I am not denying there is a conflict of interest, just the accusation of abuse of power. So put up or shut up
_________________
A free press is the unsleeping guardian of every other right that free men prize; it is the most dangerous foe of tyranny. Where men have the habit of liberty, the Press will continue to be the vigilant guardian of the rights of the ordinary citizen.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
krinn
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 02 May 2003
Posts: 4398

PostPosted: Tue Mar 04, 2014 1:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Naib wrote:
You are hte one stating he is abusing his position, so show it.

Were did you read that ?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Naib
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 4185
Location: Removed by Neddy

PostPosted: Tue Mar 04, 2014 1:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
is abusing his position.

_________________
A free press is the unsleeping guardian of every other right that free men prize; it is the most dangerous foe of tyranny. Where men have the habit of liberty, the Press will continue to be the vigilant guardian of the rights of the ordinary citizen.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
desultory
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 04 Nov 2005
Posts: 8032

PostPosted: Tue Mar 04, 2014 6:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

PaulBredbury wrote:
steveL wrote:
criticism of systemd suppressed.

No, it's your trolling that's the problem - saying 100 times, "I hate systemd", is *not* reasonable criticism - it's gone beyond all reasonable constraints ;)

*I'm* telling you this, and just to be crystal clear, I'm actually on your side against systemd. The difference is, I do something about it, rather than just moan ad nauseum.
Disagreeing with his, perhaps too often restated, opinion regarding systemd does not make him wrong about your apparent impending, if not current, burnout.

TomWij wrote:
This applies recursively; for example, I can deem that labeling it as newspeak is at best a poor attempt at a solution, perhaps giving the concept of "labeling it as newspeak" its own label. Call it "newspeaklabeling" or so.
Except that I was not proposing a solution, I was merely observing that your proposal was inadequate.
TomWij wrote:
Gentoo ComRel has authority across Gentoo's borders, as stated by their own description; the same goes for higher instances like the Gentoo Council and Gentoo Infrastructure. Their involvement, however, is somewhat comparable to the involvement of the moderators here, hands-off.
Nowhere do they claim to require consultation with them for anyone to handle problems in the media for which they are responsible. Be sure to get your facts straight before attempting to correct someone in regards to them.
TomWij wrote:
Where do I react defensively of dismissively? What I am writing listens and supports; there is not much to defend or dismiss other than the limits put forward of the various resources like manpower, processes and tools that we have available. In this respect that is a honest "look, we can can't do this because ...; we need more contributions, revised processes and improved tools to be able to achieve this"; giving explanation through listening and support like this is much better than ignoring the person altogether, as that gives an understanding of what we need to do to achieve what the users want.
You are conflating your valid responses to user requests, inquiries and/or complaints with your responses to critiques of your improper behaviors. Telling someone that there are insufficient resources for a proposed task to be reasonably undertaken is a valid and useful response, repeating it in the same venue regarding the same task diminishingly so; reacting to criticism as you have here and elsewhere has been rather disappointingly less so yet.
TomWij wrote:
Look at it differently: If I were to fulfill a political agenda, I would do so on the mailing lists; there is nothing to gain by using the forums for this, as it would rather have the opposite effect of making the political agenda fail because it raises awareness and has people stop it. If I didn't give a shit about the users, then I also wouldn't be here; however, I don't fulfill a political agenda in the context of systemd and I am instead concerned about the users being affected by political agenda and that's pretty much why I am here. But it is hard to listen and support when people go across the lines of the forum guide; and so we have come to this point, where the signal that I am trying to listen to is hidden in noise. The time has come to put on another radio channel...
You seem to not realize a critical point here: I do not care if you are attempting to work toward a political agenda or not, I care whether you are causing undue disruption to the forums.

It has not escaped notice that your posts after the one quoted are markedly improved over prior traffic in this topic.

PaulBredbury wrote:
Hey, this is my thread you're hijacking! Go make your own thread to fight in :evil:

Know what this thread needs? Moderators doing what they're supposed to, banning the trolls. This thread seems to attract them like flypaper, conveniently :?

Edit: I have an idea. Every time someone trolls regarding systemd, they get banned until they've submitted an ebuild patch to bugzilla :idea:

That will force all these idiots to do something useful for a change. Revolutionary, yes?


PaulBredbury wrote:
Get out of my thread, you troll. Don't come back until you've submitted patches to optionally support your system!

Use your energy to do something useful, you damned troll :evil:
Either you are in dire need of some time away from the forums, or you are running badly afoul of Poe's Law. In the former case, please take as much time as you need; in the latter case, kindly indicate as much and reduce your parody/satire/sarcasm levels to those which can be readily recognized as such.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
PaulBredbury
Watchman
Watchman


Joined: 14 Jul 2005
Posts: 7310

PostPosted: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

desultory wrote:
parody/satire/sarcasm levels

This thread is the comedy. It was simply a request to do something about the level of trolling/bickering, a seemingly simple task.

Instead, it resulted in yet more trolling and bickering, and *in this* thread 8O

The smileys are a bit limited, and I enjoy writing succinctly, so please just assume I'm trying to help, if there's any doubt.

However, to get back to the main point, the reason why this thread was started - I don't believe that "light touch" moderation will keep this gaggle of arguers in a semi-respectable order. For evidence, well, see this thread.

So, in summary, I'm off to better-moderated forums. Enjoy ;)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Akkara
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 28 Mar 2006
Posts: 5282
Location: &akkara

PostPosted: Tue Mar 04, 2014 11:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

This thread is way past it's expiration date and has gotten mighty rotten. Locked.

Please, everyone - take a breather. Don't post anything regarding init systems for at least several days if not a week. (And this includes no metaposting too). Let's see if things are better after the air clears some.
_________________
echo 'long long long x;' | gcc -x c -c -
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Gentoo Forums Feedback All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5
Page 5 of 5

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum