On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 12:20 PM, Jean Flamelle eaterjolly@gmail.com wrote:
I think the driving point no one wants to argue about and therefore has been lapdancing around, is one way or another systemd is developed by a very ambitious company.
this reminds me: when kde received $10m in EU funding, what they developed was a copy of the worst ever variant of windows [vista] and it shocked a lot of people. plasma took years to develop, was more complex and really didn't do anything better than what the existing python bindings to KDE's underlying architecture already did.
the point being: when money gets involved, people can drop whatever they were doing and can focus full-time on "coding". but the downside of that is that they *do* focus full-time on "coding"... and less time on thinking, talking, relaxing, designing, communicating and creativity.
i've seen it happen so many times: when the pace of development is slower - because it's done part-time - naturally what results is... better code. why? because people spent more of their down-time *actually thinking* and mulling things over.
the rapid pace of the projects funded by redhat are near-consistently causing grief and aggravation. one of the ones _not_ causing grief [from redhat-funded developers] is the linux kernel project and that is a huge exception because it has so many contributors that it has a totally different development track.
i thought this might help as i don't believe that redhat is *deliberately* intending to piss people off by rushing ahead, but that's what's happening as a direct result of redhat trying to justify its existence in a commercial world.
I sincerely understand these are people trying to make the world a sweeter place albeit in a "ends are more important than means"-kinda-unintentional-way.
i'm reminded of bob podolski's words (actually probably john david garcia's): ethical ends can *never* be achieved by unethical means....
Hope, I'm helping with perspective :d
always. thank you jean.
l.