On 20/12/11 07:15, Michal Kubeček wrote:
On Tuesday 20 of December 2011 00:48EN, Cristian Rodríguez wrote:
This is one of the effects of this proposal, we focus in one way to do things, make it handle the few cases it does not and this issue will go away.
This would mean forcing systemd on users whether they want it or not, whether it gives them something or not, even whether it works for them or not. Please don't do it. Please show first that systemd can work reliably and that it can give the users (admins) something that the old solution didn't. This is the way to persuade people that the new solution is better than the old one, not forcing it on them and not giving them a choice.
My proposition is: don't even start to talk about taking normal init away until there is at least one distribution release where systemd works at least as well as init does (and 12.1 definitely isn't one).
Michal Kubeèek
I couldn't agree more. Many shops where QC must be convinced, would consider systemd a disruptive change which would certainly not be passed as fit for deployment currently and so would consign it to test only.
If that meant not deploying 12.2, fine, they'd have another look at systemd status at 12.3.
I have been in such meetings with corporate customers who would readily turn down the strongest of technical recommendations if they thought there was the slightest chance of an exposure as they see it, even one that could and should be readily circumvented or fixed.
A Saturday job that should have easily been completed in 8 hours actually took 12 hours on Saturday and 9 hours on Sunday because of the customer's "unjustified" fears - his prerogative certainly and that was without a single hitch.
Right or wrong, the customer will be the judge of what's in their best interest. Regards Sid.