Interpreting the Debian init system GR (Russ Allbery)

I originally posted this in a thread on debian-private, but on further reflection it seems appropriate for a broader audience. So I'm posting it here, as well as on debian-project. There is quite a lot of discussion in various places about what the recent GR result means. Some are concluding that systemd won in some way that implies Debian is not going to support other init systems, or at least that support for other init systems is in immediate danger. A lot of that analysis concludes that the pro-systemd "side" in Debian won some sort of conclusive victory. I have a different perspective. I think we just had a GR in which the Debian developer community said that we, as a community, would like to work through all of the issues around init systems together, as a community, rather than having any one side of the argument win unambiguously and impose its views on those who disagree. There were options on the ballot that clearly required loose coupling and that clearly required tight coupling. The top two options did neither of those things. The second-highest option said, effectively, that we should feel free to exercise our technical judgement for our own packages, but should do so with an eye to enabling people to make different choices, and should merge their changes and contributions where possible. The highest option said that we don't even want to say that, and would instead prefer to work this whole thing out through discussion, respect, consensus, and mutual support, without giving *anyone* a clear mandate or project-wide blessing for their approach. In other words, the way I choose to look at this GR is that the project as a whole just voted to take away the sticks that we were using to beat each other with. In a way, we just chose thet *hardest* option. We didn't make a simplifying technical decision that provides clear guidance to everyone. Instead, we made a complicating social decision that says that, sorry, there's no short cut to avoid having to talk to each other, respect each other's views, and try to reach workable collaborative compromises. Even though it's really hard, even though everyone is raw and upset, that's what the project as a whole is asking us to do. Are we up to the challenge?

http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/journal/2014-11/003.html

Results: https://vote.debian.org/~secretary/gr_initcoupling/

I don't think this is what people are in the mood to hear. Sorry, can't explain that.

There seems to be a need for a large secret conspiracy behind everything that goes on in any organization for people to blame for anything that worries them. That appears to be just the way people are thinking these days. Maybe always have.

I think it stems from the fact that it is easier to attribute actions and ideas to conspiracy than to consider things in the long run or to even consider undue influence (corruption) for actions or ideas.

No, I don't think there is either corruption or conspiracy. I think a disission needed to be made and that was made. Like most things of this nature most people are probably not jubilant about the outcome. This is as it should be. Give and take and compromise are needed to keep any sort of organization; local public sport teams, local or national governments, working and people not unhappy enough to just give up on it.

I don't have the technical skills to evaluate systemd or any other init system in a meaningful way. I can just use the system and see if it works and how hard it is to become comfortable with it.

I think the way Debian is integrating it from start of discussion to the present is pretty good actually. Had no embarassing fights that I have heard of. People hotly defended their possitions as they should do. A vote was taken. Implementation seems to be going fairly well.

There have been a couple problems that I have had that I believe may be based in that implementation but they are clearing up and I am not sure what was behind them. They are not problems that most people would have, they seemed related to the way I work.

The commands for some system operations for Systemd irritate me. They are too long for me to remember. Bash aliases seem to take care of that problem pretty simply.

Things change even if I or any of use don't like it. In comparison to a lot of changes this just is not a big deal. I have been at a loss as to the hysteria surrounding it. Sounded a lot like the hysteria around the "Bomb" in the 60s.

Somehow, having gone through that and now this, I find the similarity very sad. Systemd, like it or not, really doesn't have even the theoretical ability to actually break the planet into smaller pieces. It really is not something that has anything what so ever to do with the end of the world.

You wouldn't guess it from some of the things I read.

Thank you for posting this. Any sort of democratic process is messy. While people insist on there being winners and loosers in any vote this really is not the case. Descissions have to be made. A vote was taken, the descission was made.

Would people have been happier with just one autocrat making this in private or the way it was done? A voice of sanity is very welcome.