Top posting to save others from scrolling. Please stop. I've always valued having an openSUSE@openSUSE.org ML, but this is going nowhere. Without reading the entire 2 miles you''re posting today, this is not what the openSUSE@openSUSE.org ML is for. It is not your personal ML. It's there to offer support. People are refusing to use this list, for &*^& sake. Op donderdag 20 juli 2017 21:06:46 CEST schreef L A Walsh:

FWIW, Responding to notes like these takes time -- days for a first draft (over 2 days for this one). Most of my notes take time for anything but simple answers as I too often need to spend time looking things up. Even after writing a note there are many times I don't think it is good enough or worthwhile enough to send and end saying nothing and only wasting hours or days of composition. sigh.

It's also not a real fun topic area: politics, confirming and finding the basis for perceptions and/or correcting misperceptions, but feeling a need to understand what feels like a disproportionate amount of blame or anger for excessive characterizations that don't seem to fit my actions.

That said...

Richard Brown wrote:

...

On 17 July 2017 at 02:56, L A Walsh wrote:

...

---

If you are tired of "running" this list, let me know and I'll

take it over, as well as creating a opensuse-systemd discussion group.

I am not tired of being responsible for this Project, and when that day comes I will do my best to hand over the reigns to someone who has demonstrated an ability to act in good faith while contributing to the community. That will not be you.

The ability to remain professional or detached when managing a list is a key trait of a good list owner. Failure to remain objective can often be a sign of burnout and the need to 'get away from it'. Taking your frustrations out on a list-member really doesn't seem proper -- especially when your attacks are vague, without facts, and couched in threats about the actions of a board that you seem to indicate will follow your direction.

Even your response above is loaded with manipulative phrasing -- saying that anyone running this list will act in "good faith" (in your judgment), while contributing to the community (in your judgment) -- with the goal being that those who are tasked with voting on an issue, show "good faith" by making judgments as you would make them (I.e. "good faith behavior" = emulating you). Certainly many looking up to you will want to demonstrate such regardless of the details.

As for my "contributions" -- I got that they were no longer wanted unless I was willing to make them systemd compatible, where appropriate. Examples included a few startup scripts to improve flexibility, reliability and/or security, as well as Makefile changes to accomplish similar goals.

It may or may not have been mentioned, but it seemed that using something like wicked or a new tool to determine boot-dependencies could build a disk-bootable kernel for users that wanted them. I thought I might look at that if I had time and got things to work, though given the current SW climate and my energy levels, I don't have much enthusiasm for doing any SW work -- especially when the environment becomes threatening, coercive and hostile.

...

...

My suggestion is to create a separate venue for all systemd related discussion. That provides a neutral way to recover this list for more general support purposes (other than kernel, factory or systemd topics).

There is already a place to discuss systemd design, such as its flexibility and configurability. It is https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel

--- I wasn't aware it was the venue for systemd integration, implementation, alternatives and problems *as* *specifically* related to opensuse. There have been several design decisions that ostensibly have had little to do with systemd-devel that have been implemented within opensuse's implementation that don't seem required by systemd. It doesn't seem appropriate to discuss opensuse's specific implementation details, especially ones that don't directly relate to systemd-devel.

As an example, systemd recommends booting directly from disk and not using initrd to support fast booting. Fast booting was initially given as one of the reasons for the move to a new boot system. Given that premise, it is surprising that direct boot, previously supported, was removed as a supported option with the move to systemd -- EVEN though systemd recommends using it for boot speed. Some people think that talking about this issue has something to do with systemd -- IT DOESN'T as systemd doesn't require it.

This highlights part of the problem. For me -- several of the decisions regarding opensuse boot don't seem to be part of a generic systemd implementation, but were about choices opensuse made. I am pretty sure that systemd-devel would NOT be a place to find out or discuss these opensuse differences.

...

At this time there is no point creating an openSUSE equivalent to this list, as our maintainers do not need a new list to read when that upstream one works perfectly fine for their current work.

---- Because as decisions arise regarding how to implement opensuse's integration of systemd were in what group? Where is the archive? AFAIK, there isn't one.

...

That always could change if more contributors got involved, as is the case with the kernel, but it's been 6 years now so I think the situation is unlikely.

From what has been said in the past, these decisions were made "offline" at F2F meetings in Europe, some at O.S. conferences. The message given was that if you didn't attend, you were not allowed input into the decision process. This seems to point at another need for more communication about boot & service processes/control on openSuSE.

You say things haven't changed for 6 years, so having a venue to talk about the current processes (or change) is not needed -- yet saying it "isn't needed" is a perpetuation of the thinking and manipulation that made the change without the input of the online community. You don't want it discussed here, and you don't want it discussed in another group -- just like you didn't want it discussed online when the decision was made to change the boot+service control environment.

It's not about "it's over"... it's a matter of 1) it not beginning, and 2) asserting that how it is now, is "permanent" and no one should be allowed to discuss anything different unless they've already created a new option.

I've had more than one experience with creating new options in "open-source" SW -- to have them rejected after the "put-up-or-shut-up" bluff was called. How is it different in this situation?

As for another 'group' -- it's also the case that the group wouldn't necessarily be aimed at developers, but at those from this group that might want systemd help or want to discuss it past the tolerance level of people on this group.

It was for _you_ and the community that _I_ thought separating out systemd discussion would be of benefit. It seemed that would be both a fair method of achieving your goal to reduce discussion of it here, as well as allowing design discussions, including how to work around various shortcomings that people using opensuse have encountered.

I'm surprised you would be against such an option -- almost as if you prefer a heavy-handed method as only that method will allow you to get rid of community members you don't like.

...

...

...

Right now, the several hundred contributors to openSUSE all support only systemd.

And they all have expressed their choice to do so? And others weren't

disallowed contributing due to random problems?

Every single contributor has the right to contribute what they want, how they want.

---- If systemd can't be discussed, how much freedom can there possibly be to support variations?

...

If someone woke up tomorrow and somehow resurrected SysV init support, patched all the upstream projects that no longer support SysV init, and made sure they all worked to our standard level of quality, then I'm sure we'd take those contributions, somehow.

---- Are you saying that, say, 11.3 or 11.4 didn't support "your level" of quality? It was my experience, that I could upgrade from the 8, 9, 10 and 11 series to the next level, and not end up with a non-bootable system. Multiple times in upgrades in the later 12's and 13's I had to restore files from backup to get a working system again. Yet I get the impression that if I report such problems and they have anything to do with the boot system, system services (daemons), program communications -- or anything else that systemd has touched, I'd be talking about a forbidden topic.

The last time I tried making a VM with tumbleweed, I didn't even get to a login prompt. The time before, trying to install leap, I was told that the version I tried wasn't released yet (I mistakenly thought leap was a line of released products, and that factory was still the factory portion of things -- my bad).

Nevertheless, my experience in trying to run from a standard install image into a VM (not anything to do with my "modified"[sic] server), has not given me the impression of increased quality.

...

I do not buy the 'random problems' nonsense - you could always make a new OBS account if your old one is broken.

--- I wanted to find out how "I" broke the existing one and fix it. If I don't know what I did wrong, it's very likely I'd end up in the same situation again. Jumping forward without understanding what went wrong seems a waste of time to me, bordering on foolishness, yet you don't "buy it". Hmmm.

...

...

...

But the fact is, the people involved in hating on systemd and discuessing it endlessly have done nothing to correct that.

Ok, here's one where I want proof. You claim I "hate" systemd, show me where I clearly indicate that. I'm pretty sure I've liked some things -- maybe most of it, but disliked some design decisions and how it has been forced from the top down. Even now, discussion is being threatened with terminating peoples' list membership, up to and including the whole list if you don't get your way.

As for doing nothing to correct problems? I have at least ~3000 lines of perl and ~1000 of shell to fix these problems, but I wouldn't consider them production. Sorry to disillusion you but it is not my highest priority.

...

...

I spoke up against removal and gutting of LSB utils like chkconfig to redirect things to sysd, followed by wholesale conversion and removal of scripts from /etc/init.d.

Mostly a result of decisions made by the various upstreams.

---- Some yes, but I wouldn't say mostly since many upstream tools have a fair number of users and systems that want unix compatibility. Posix is making a resurgence, and I've yet to see posix compatibility be even on the radar of systemd. Note: I'm not a posix fan, I'm just noticing pressures toward older compatibility increasing in some areas -- maybe not incompatibly, I don't know.

...

Maintaining old cruft, which sysVinit now is, requires people to do it. When we have no one to do it, there is nothing to discuss. Ergo, no reason to post a systemd related discussion on this list.

I usually don't post anything about the work I'd done until I thought I had something I wanted to release. I have too many things I've wanted to do and not enough time to do them.

...

And even if there was reason to discuss systemd, something like that isn't a user support topic, so there is no reason to discuss it on this list.

----

There were already 50 notes in the thread when I made my first post. I posted in response to someone talking about how configurable and flexible it was -- which wasn't my experience -- something that I wanted to bring up. It's always possible things have changed and I was in the dark.

...

This mailinglist is not opensuse-lindas-sandbox@opensuse.org.

On what basis do you make such an attack?

Since January, I've posted 12 new topic notes having nothing to do with sysd (gcc, finding uninstalled files, 'getdelays', handbrake, browser configuration, finding opensuse rfc package, inet utils, static linking of sash, virtual box problem, gnuchess dep, wget security).

One was about broken symlinks (could have been taken as related to boot, as related to sysd).

And 2 mentioning sysd (samsung usage, and ubuntu dns problems).

Sorry, but where you do you get those are anything to do privately w/me?

Responses... too many to analyze, but I'll grant it is likely they may have more sysd related stuff as they are generally in response to others talking about it, one way or the other. If I read something that is NOT true, and goes against my experience, I'm likely to speak up with concrete examples. That isn't religion, and the above doesn't even begin to approach me earning your insulting characterizing.

...

We will not make such a list to accommodate you.

---- I've not asked for such -- and if this anyone's personal list, it seems to be yours, as you are threatening to take your toys and go home if you don't get your way and people don't ban people for non-factual reasons.

Same has gone for the issue of my system being "modded or not". As mentioned elsewhere, my "modifications"[sic] have mostly been in NOT allowing newer modifications to delete older OpenSuse behaviors and features. I generally don't go off extensively on those issues as most people would find such detail boring, but some come up as people ask about 'this' or 'that', and I relate such.

The only list i asked for was a separate list so a topic that bothered *you* so much would be more easily diverted off this list. As I said, maybe no one would post -- I don't know if I'd have time to post or read it. It was for _YOU_ and systemd-discussion-haters that I proposed a different list, so you wouldn't have to look at it, and people here could quickly point posters to that list for its discussion. I'm was quite serious -- and you just don't get it.

You seem to prefer the opportunity to expel people for responding to other people discussing your forbidden topics. If that's the case, you'll find your reasons no matter what. If you want to kick people who've been using opensuse since, at least, dec 1999 (ordered cd's/dvd) and on this list since, at least, 2001, then please let people know how unappreciated long-term users and contributors (as in filing bugs and providing solution sources) go right ahead.

...

Please keep your

conversations relevant to this list,

I have been and have even given a way to increase this list's focus -- but you seem to want some people to discuss it here, but NOT others. That's decidedly unfair.

...

and take your concerns regarding systemd ... We've had 6 years of moaning, misusing openSUSE mailinglists for ...

---- You have had 6 years of problems that people have run into. I can't say that's true for everyone, but I rarely post about non problems. I mention my experience and problems in getting things to work. When they don't work I'm told it is my fault and that you don't want to hear about such problems until I contribute something. You don't realize how asinine that sounds.

Let people know that the "open"[sic] suse lists are for contributors-only, and mentioning or responding to sysd problems w/ones own related probs or experience (who would like workarounds and would like to see more things *not* break) is strictly verboten under your rules.

Like I said, if you have evidence to back up what you are saying, show me the specifics and let me know what I should have done instead. As it is, I try to not post or read this list very often for fear that I might respond.

OTOH, I can go back and produce statistics, though not necessarily easily. But I've been on this list for alot more time than sysd has been around, so I think the numbers will weigh in favor of most of my posts NOT being about sysd.

You want to get rid of people around over a decade from before systemd came about? What community are you trying to save?

-- Gertjan Lettink, a.k.a. Knurpht openSUSE Board Member openSUSE Forums Team -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org

Please, please discuss this elsewhere. I am reading this list to provide support for people wherever/whenever I am capable, not to filter through drama. I am sure that you raise valid points, and I am certain that so does Richard, but I've really had it with these endless back-and-forths. Best regards, Carmen -- Carmen Bianca Bakker PGP: 2A09 F627 39F6 DEC8 CFFC A216 CD0A 90F1 C5CA 0C92

On 7/20/2017 3:06 PM, L A Walsh wrote:

FWIW, Responding to notes like these takes time -- days for a first draft (over 2 days for this one). Most of my notes take time for anything but simple answers as I too often need to spend time looking things up. Even after writing a note there are many times I don't think it is good enough or worthwhile enough to send and end saying nothing and only wasting hours or days of composition. sigh.

That definitely seems to be a factor, that someone who does not invest much thought in their posts does not properly interpret that someone else might have. IE: Not all statements are equal. One person might say something after 45 minutes of research and on the spot testing and checking assumptions, and then someone else hearing it will disregard it lightly, because they themselves never do that. Their own statements are mere opinion, so they perceive and treat all other statements as equally insubstantial. I naively keep thinking that there's really nothing you can do except keep on making sure your own statements hold water, so that ultimately the record can always shake out the truth. But in reality that doesn't usually happen. A tide of opinion can often totally override and ignore facts and robust reasoning. No one reads through a thread from the beginning to see if there is a pattern to show who deserves to be believed and who doesn't. Sometimes I try to ask things as questions, to force people to realize for themselves that they can't answer the question, other than by saying what I would have said. The idea being that you can't simply tell some people anything, regardless if it's a true fact or if it's a sequence of reasoning that holds water. But if they arrive at the truth themselves by trying to answer a question, then they can't very well simply ignore it because they ignore everything from a source they don't like. Even this very often doesn't work. At that point the topic is exposed as religion, and there is nothing you can do about someone who is religious on a topic. They will in fact accuse you of the same thing, whether that accusation has any basis or not. It's like mere namecalling instead of an actual set of words with an actual meaning. There's nothing you can do about that either. -- bkw -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org