Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Are you sure? (Score 1) 811

My point was that systemd was tested for 3 years over 5 releases of Fedora.

Parts of it, anyway. Aren't they still designing replacements out of whole cloth these days?

And why do you have a bias against Red Hat developers?

It's not a bias so much as acknowledging that they, as RedHat employees, have a vested interest in the success of systemd, their product.

Comment: Re:Are you sure? (Score 1) 811

Then why you not trust the Debian developers to make a very informed decision about adopting systemd?

When half the guys on the board are Red Hat employees and the vote just by sheer coincidence is a 50-50 split, I'm not filled with trust.

Fedora is using systemd since Fedora 15 (now we are at Fedora 20). That means 5 released of testing (three years) and adopted by Red Hat Enterprise Linux since version 7

Well no shit. Systemd is a Red Hat project, so of course it's in Fedora.

Comment: Re:Are you sure? (Score 1) 811

I think your argument boils down to "I don't like systemd because it's new and I don't like new stuff".

So put it on your own damn branch!

Especially considering this is Debian we're talking about, I don't understand why so many pro-systemd people are saying "if you don't like it, then fork off a non-systemd version." It's DEBIAN. Debian is all about NOT having the new unstable shiny!

Comment: Re:Are you sure? (Score 1) 811

Assuming I'm reading this right:

D U O V F - Bdale Garbee
D U O V F - Russ Allbery
D U O V F - Don Armstrong
D U O V F - Keith Packard (Intel)
U D O F V - Colin Watson
U F D O V - Andreas Barth
F U D O V - Steve Langasek (Canonical)
F V O U D - Ian Jackson

D systemd
U upstart
O openrc
V sysvinit (no change)
F requires further discussion

So assuming left-to-right priority, 2 votes were for "further discussion." So it was more or less a 4-2 vote with 2 abstentions. Langasek's second choice was upstart, and Jackson's second choice was sysvinit. If they both went to the upstart side--which sounds like a quite reasonable outcome to me--we'd be looking at a 4-4 tie. If a tie-breaker is necessary to break deadlock, there is NO WAY you can call it "overwhelming."

Like I said before, 50%+1 (which this vote wasn't, even) is not my definition of "overwhelming." I dare say that most people would call that a majority (more votes than all other choices combined). This is merely a plurality, among a particularly small sample size at that.

Ich kann mit Übersetzungsschwierigkeiten sympathisieren.

Comment: Re:This was no AP. (Score 1) 330

by TangoMargarine (#48256471) Attached to: LAX To London Flight Delayed Over "Al-Quida" Wi-Fi Name

Salameh had reported the van stolen, and when he returned on March 4, 1993, to get his deposit back, authorities arrested him.[23]

Even if it *was* stolen, why the heck would they give him his deposit back? "Oh, I'm sorry, I lost your vehicle somewhere...can I have my deposit back that I gave you to cover this exact eventuality?" Maybe if the cops recovered it somewhere, fine, but that obviously wasn't going to be the case.

Comment: Re:And apps while we're at it (Score 1) 811

That he was phrasing it as a hypothetical situation means he ISN'T dictating what they do, which you would understand if you didn't just post a kneejerk response. That he has no input on the steering of those listed projects is what's prompting the hypothetical in the first place. You're attacking him for doing things he's implying he can't (and won't) do.

Oh, and it's spelled "narcissistic."

Faith may be defined briefly as an illogical belief in the occurence of the improbable. - H. L. Mencken