This DMCA takedown request is invalid. And it all comes down to the statement "As the Minecraft Server software is included in CraftBukkit, and the original code has not been provided or its use authorized, this is a violation of my copyright". That statement is incorrect. It is a violation of MOJANG's copyright (As they are the copyright holders of the original server software, which has been decompiled and partially deobfuscated in this case). Wolfe's contributions are licensed under the GPL, and he can't withdraw that license, so he is in no situation to order a takedown on his own code. And he can't order a takedown based on Mojang's code, as he doesn't own that copyright either.
The "Parts of Minecraft" are decompiled and unobfuscated by a third party from the Java binary that Mojang distribute. These parts infringe on Mojang's copyright, and have never been licensed for use anywhere. Technically, Mojang were doing the community a favour by not issuing legal challenges and takedowns for this illegal decompilation of their work.
Oh, and unless I've missed something, Wolfe can't issue a DMCA for his own code, as he has already licensed it under the GPL, and is not allowed to withdraw that license.
1. ok, so it needs a bit of rework to multithread its process-starting system. I that significantly more difficult that rewriting the entire loader?
It needs more than just "a bit of rework", it requires a complete overhaul. Which is what SystemD is.
2. So it needs an extension to monitor services. Technically, I think this is better handled by a different task, one that is more into monitoring rather than blindly just continually-restarting a service that's crashed due to some external dependancy failure. Again, its not much of a task to add this than it is to rewrite the entire loader.
So, instead of one system handling bringing up a service, you want two. One to bring it up at runtime, and another to bring it back up if/when it crashes.
What SystemD is doing is, rather than using a stupid-simple for loop to start things, it's using an event-based system. This also means you can have things happen like "Network comes up, start network-dependent services", "USB printer plugged in, start print daemon", "Device hot-plugged, start dependent services". These are all things that are missing from the current SysV system, and require extra tools, along with their associated extra configuration and extra points of failure.
You're posting a lot on the drawbacks of SystemD, but you're not including any of the drawbacks for SystemV.
- SysV starts every task and service one at a time, waiting for the previous one to finish before it starts the next. This is fine for single-core single-threaded workloads, but most systems these days are multi-core. It also means that startup is slow. SystemD, on the other hand, can (and does) start up services in parallel, making sure that dependencies are resolved before starting the next item. This makes SystemD MUCH faster at booting.
- SysV only handles the initial bringing up, and the final tearing down, of services. Any service failures are not noticed, any errors are not dealt with. SystemD monitors services even while they're running, and can re-start them if they fail, handle crash reporting and log rotation. This makes SystemD more error resilient and stable.
- SysV only runs the services, and doesn't care about their configuration, so basic configuration and dependencies have to be handled in a myriad of ways, different for every service. SystemD attempts to be a central repository for ports (and handling the necessary firewall rules for them), configuration files, logging locations, and the rest. While this does make startup a touch more difficult to configure, it makes the system as a whole a lot simpler to deal with.
Yes, because the US cheats and uses 220 split-phase to provide 110 power. Most everywhere else that needs high power uses 3-phase, as it's smoother, easier to produce and rectify, and just as safe to transmit.
3 phase makes electric motors more efficient, and that's it. Technically, you could have as many phases as you could imagine having... each making the motor a tad more efficient. But they are not "smoother" and don't improve transmission.
3-Phase AC produces a smoother (considerably less ripple) DC current pattern when rectified than single or split-phase AC.
3 Phase doesn't require the return neutral, unless your load is very unbalanced. So they both require 3 wires to transmit.
And yes, it does appear to be a simple buck converter. Though you could probably use a Z-Source inverter too.