From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ams@gnu.org (Alfred M. Szmidt) Subject: Re: (Really) Free Software future Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2019 17:00:09 -0400 Message-ID: References: <6343757.2cZvDvYTfs@pc-713> <20191010061705.GH27628@protected.rcdrun.com> <20191010070606.GW27628@protected.rcdrun.com> <8561e1505c3d90c4deb8bdbfb1a20dced6e96066.camel@gnu.org> Return-path: In-reply-to: (message from Svante Signell on Tue, 15 Oct 2019 21:56:08 +0200) List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: svante.signell@gmail.com Cc: Guix-devel@gnu.org, gnu-system-discuss@gnu.org, rms@gnu.org > If systemD is be hard to replace, that is a kind of lock-in. But it > isn't _vendor_ lock-in. systemD, like most free software packages, > is not tied to any particular vendor. Indeed, the usual concept of > "vendor" for free software is not applicable to free software at all. Sorry Richard, but it is really a vendor lock-in. As you know there is only one _upstream_ of systemd and that upstream is a company. Systemd software is developed by that company, and as you also know is that contributions, patches and bug reports coming from outside that company are frown upon. People reporting issues are even met with hostility. Since it is free software, it would be easy for anyone to create another such project. In conclusion: systemd is a _vendor_ lock-in. Fortunately Guix/Shepherd are not (yet??) using systemd, but they use e.g. eudev and elogind. When Wolfgang and I designed GNU dmd (I don't know how much GNU shepard has change from that, which is why I'm refering to it by its original name), the idea was in some sense quite similar to how systemd works.