Re: Requiring systemd for the gnome-settings-daemon power plugin

[Bastien Nocera <hadess hadess net>]

On Fri, 2012-10-19 at 19:20 +0200, Sebastien Bacher wrote:
> Le 19/10/2012 15:41, Matthias Clasen a écrit :
> > I don't think that is a very productive way to have a discussion. What
> > are you hoping to achieve ?
> The discussion went this way:
> 1: "g-s-d will drop non systemd support"
> 2: could we define standard interface that are up to the distributor to 
> implement rather than depends on systemd? an hard depends would mean 
> those choices for non systemd distributors: <list of options I could see>
> 1: "no, I don't intend to spend any time on that, if you don't want to 
> use systemd you need to work with systemd upstream"
> 2: "ok, well I guess we need to think what to do then, but it's limiting 
> our options to get GNOME shipped"

"could we define standard interface"
"I don't intend to spend any time on that"

Notice the pronouns. You're more than welcome helping define the
interfaces, there's just not going to be me there, helping out.

> I'm not sure how "unproductive" it has been, it's merely stating intends 
> and sharing concerns...
> 
> What I'm hoping to achieve? I guess letting know GNOME, as a project, 
> know in what position this choice put some of the distributors and what 
> might be the outcome. It's sharing information and communicating ... is 
> there any issue with that?