On 07/09/2014 03:20 PM, Les Mikesell wrote: > No, that is exactly my point. Back then the griping by affected active > users happened in more or less real time compared to the changes being > done. Now fedora goes off on its own merry way for years before its > breakage comes back to haunt the people that wanted stability. Real-time? Since when? The development direction was already pretty much done by the time the public betas were released and the griping began. Even by the time of the private betas the development direction on several of the releases was already pretty much set in stone. I only had a bit of input for PostgreSQL because I was maintaining the upstream RPM package at the time; but I had no pre-beta access to whatever was in the beehive queue at the time. With fedora, on the other hand, you already know that what is going in the next version of EL is going to be previewed in Fedora and you are absolutely free to follow the Fedora lists and get involved in the actual process, rather than being fed an already mostly-baked beta every so often. If you don't follow the Fedora lists and get involved, well, you get what you pay for, I guess. I don't currently follow the Fedora lists, incidentally, but I do track the features that are being implemented. We already had Upstart, and the move from Upstart to systemd is not that big (at least in my opinion), so it's not something that got me up in arms. Plain text non-XML configs that can be on a non-executable filesystem and lots of really nice options in the unit configs really change the way you think of system startup. It is a change; I've not decided whether I think is a good change or not; most of the big Linux distributions have decided that it is a good change. In a quick google, I found what I thought to be a pretty clearly written article (from 2012) on systemd's strong points from the point of view of a server admin: http://utcc.utoronto.ca/~cks/space/blog/linux/SystemdRight?showcomments If it can really deliver this, particularly the feature of sysadmin-modified units all being in one place, yeah, looks like a good thing. And there will be plenty of eyes on it. Most of the articles looking at systemd's weak points (and there are several) aren't written in nearly as level a fashion as the above. Lots of vitriol to go around, unfortunately. > ... > Don't think people running a bunch of RH5 servers really cared about X > or desktops at all... You missed my Red Baron comment, didn't you? I ran Red Hat Linux 4.1 as a desktop, and once Mandrake 5.3 was out I went completely Linux as my primary work and personal desktop. I figured if I was going to run it as a server I needed to 'dogfood' things and really rely on it for daily work. And my employer agreed. The days StarOffice became OpenOffice.org and then when OO.o 1.0 wound its way into RHL were very good days for this desktop Linux user. ... > Yes, but on the other hand, people still pay large sums of money for > other operating systems. And there are some reasons for that. > Many of which are not technical.