> I see you've added portability off Linux. That's a very small concern, and certainly lower than 'deep Linux integration' for most Linux users.
It didn't help systemd's popularity that the people behind it have tried to do disgusting stuff like convince GNOME to make GNOME dependent on it, which doesn't just effect "portability off linux" but the portability of GNOME. (I don't believe they got that one through)
I'm a GNOME release team member. We get really nice contributions from OpenBSD. But 100% of the development is done by people working on Linux. It has been that way since at least 5+ years.
This "portability" complaints is IMO empty talk: actually contribute and make things happen. However, at the moment systemd will share various things across distributions and desktop environments, allowing GNOME developers to not need to maintain as much code as we do (e.g. the freedesktop.org ConsoleKit).
I'm guessing people won't read the blogposts, but oh well :P
this is incorrect. Gnome depends on logind which is one component of systemd and which has ALREADY been adopted by upstart itself [1]
logind is basically a much better replacement for Consolekit (which is not actively maintained) and the Gnome devs want to use the other part of systemd (e.g. "systemd --user" ) to manage user sessions rather than write and maintain the code. It makes complete technical sense.
Unless you're concerned about things with compatibility with other kernels, which is something that the systemd folks explicitly don't want to do. The biggest problem with pushing all the systemd baggage into gnome, instead of working to create actual standards and apis, is that the bsd folks, the opensolaris folks, etc, who all have their own init systems that have different pros and cons are being bullied out of any say in gnome. Unfortunately, Gnome is packed with people from redhat who have no desire for things like consensus, and would rather chase the flavor of the week.
Its less a question of "don't want" than cannot. Systemd leverages core Linux kernel features like cgroups and soon, kdbus. All of this, mind you is what upstream kernel wants.
Other OSes - like Hurd and Free BSD - lose out, because they don't have these features. The systemd developers have invited others from the community to be maintainers, if they are interested in porting - but nobody has responded.
I want to leverage my Linux box better - already I'm seeing a use case for groups and systems to build and contain services for myself. I don't have any problems with Hurd, but don't want it to be dictating how I run my servers.
The only reason the CTTE discussion went on for this long is because of "greater good" outside of Linux. Else Systemd is the best for people living off Linux.
You're changing the goalposts. The initial discussion was about gnome, and their desires to ignore the many many other kernels it currently runs on in a short sighted desire to minimize developer issues. In those cases, it is absolutely a detriment to the community to force more and more requirements on systemd, instead of putting out specifications for generic dbus consumers and producers. In this context, I would definitely argue that it's not in the project's best interests to depend on another project that has stated they have no intention to make things work across different kernels.
This is the issue that people who only deal with linux don't understand. Were I to try to put software in gnome that depended on features only found in ZFS, I would be rightfully criticized for it. Why should Linux-only features get a free pass?
What you're saying is utterly incorrect, speaking as a GNOME release team member. Pretty poor to first complain about moving goalposts, yet at the same time misrepresent what was done.
In the beginning of 2012 (Jan/Feb) I highlighted the various problems. Nobody stood up to help out. Now it is 2014 and we do NOT rely on systemd.
Further, we DO rely on dbus APIs and can rely on ConsoleKit still.
What was done was certain parties made a one-sided announcement that ConsoleKit was deprecated without any discussion regarding the people who used it. Where was the call for new maintainers? Where was the call to see if the project still was viable? Re-reading the "discussion" thread still feels to all the world like a decision was made, regardless of the merits of keeping the project alive, because Lennart et al wanted to move everyone kicking and screaming to their new toy.
Furthermore, where is the GDM documentation on what it produces/consumes regarding dbus? Where's the API spec. I can find that it does use org.gnome.DisplayManager as its root, but what more from there? I have the feeling that few people are willing to help out here because Gnome feels about as transparent as a brick regarding these decisions.
It didn't help systemd's popularity that the people behind it have tried to do disgusting stuff like convince GNOME to make GNOME dependent on it, which doesn't just effect "portability off linux" but the portability of GNOME. (I don't believe they got that one through)