On Sat, 29 Nov 2014 05:28:08 +1100
Andrew McGlashan <andrew.mcglashan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 29/11/2014 5:04 AM, Miles Fidelman wrote:
Steve Litt wrote:
Well.... ok, though an editorial comment, if I might:
"modular-debian" and a list description that says:
-----
modular-debian: Toward a more modular Debian OS
Debian has recently introduced systemd as default init system,
replacing the long-serviceable sysvinit system. As dependencies on
systemd and other monolithic services diffuse through the Debian
package ecosystem, users will tend to be forced to use systemd,This
list is to discuss ways to maintain a more modular Debian
ecosystem, and to avoid snowballing dependencies on a single init
system. -----
might, just might, be a tad confusing. Perhaps it's worth
considering changing the name and description earlier, rather than
later.
If you want this to be Debian Modular specific, ten this list is also
useless to me.
It's a bad name and the description is wrong -- unless it is right and
in that case, I don't have any reason to remain here.
Cheers
A.
Hi Andrew,
I don't think anyone's trying to enforce this list being only about a
Debian solution. I think it's pretty universally acknowledged that
there will be several different solutions, and that this list
accommodates different solutions.
Changing the name at this point would be a bad idea, because the name
"modular-debian" has acquired a heck of a lot of goodwill and
publicity. Everyone knows about it. Everyone knows this is where you go
if you want a Unix like OS without systemd.
