From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.comp.sysutils.supervision.general/2674 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Casper Ti. Vector" Newsgroups: gmane.comp.sysutils.supervision.general,gmane.comp.sysutils.skaware Subject: Re: The "Unix Philosophy 2020" document Followup-To: gmane.comp.sysutils.skaware Date: Sun, 13 Oct 2019 01:37:43 +0800 Message-ID: <20191012173743.drzlgnrw4hib6hh4@CasperVector> References: <20190831130730.ki6ma7i5curucowe@caspervector> <20190901091157.bjtfhqq6d2rg75yo@CasperVector> <20190927083816.tectynx7dzlfcvb7@CasperVector> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="182346"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716 Cc: skaware@list.skarnet.org, ska-supervision@skarnet.org To: supervision@list.skarnet.org Original-X-From: supervision-return-2264-gcsg-supervision=m.gmane.org@list.skarnet.org Sat Oct 12 19:37:56 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcsg-supervision@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from alyss.skarnet.org ([95.142.172.232]) by blaine.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1iJLKz-000lGp-Tu for gcsg-supervision@m.gmane.org; Sat, 12 Oct 2019 19:37:53 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 24864 invoked by uid 89); 12 Oct 2019 17:38:16 -0000 Mailing-List: contact supervision-help@list.skarnet.org; run by ezmlm Original-Sender: Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Original-Received: (qmail 24850 invoked from network); 12 Oct 2019 17:38:16 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:date:to:cc:subject:message-id:mail-followup-to:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=xozhu7feoEuEUapX31+D/x+1qvmEFTPeeGlSSuQQYXU=; b=eM29Ass7wTIn+AwoC21cfec21apbb9ArXKeELa122lriC7vNFr+hEl+CJOxjA7LZZc Gpctq4HDhBeL13XzLjfCTxbwEOMStRCGWU4utH7EdxM2NkxylL9LTFQoCM6YXoMiTJk1 GkZRTODm4OFMHqaeJAa6zPBHIgafK/Zig3KLK6jDZZnuG7Rp07MgFaYGOQaBVDperKfB 53DIoQwhwJPr4ntTVwUdeaFguUQKP3A1+niuwJfP6fg20Omyt1IZAA1CE/T/JS1rNeR2 xe5VJqNLoO8+vs5MuKx25vhTYnC7zv7bg+MTMizJoSVA3pqwz2aoWy0NXaUrGgR1iWxP 6cFQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:date:to:cc:subject:message-id :mail-followup-to:references:mime-version:content-disposition :in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=xozhu7feoEuEUapX31+D/x+1qvmEFTPeeGlSSuQQYXU=; b=GbwJPp3vkrFRYq+KrZZL3MwoYWIfeBvJJ05DjbrSFFLb7ylX8tnt3H5HEmmRplQtMp Uw/9S6FY6VJX3UbmuZkHHDTZW633f5eTnJmH9AZuh/wG12gJat0aCYqUBHASh76ziEQ3 dT/wIN/aUXl75qz4O6mAZwlsH7fwNAcTf96BCqdesYtbQ5K3zgTWi3twgSIKTHEicU3J 1PbEvonAz54JJBjQ3y6othZ3vS3FIpV7QjdHW7wMzQKuIqscVxywi9999VFYzyk7vquE c9U49Vuvv4uqc/CQPW/NxmBg0KxV/KvBfmK/IWvatXrgqlzWNsAlOudH2vIY4gLpfbDt EkgA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWV3PkHxSFWMfCzxvc6gCWw9wHBVI0i0MLHFlBSfrbSqZwN4DXG pkLg+hTE/954xbz3Ls9tzD1jv36y X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyjRafyP9Q8rORmW+MdBAplv4JOq3q64pFV1pv2dyLX809vkI2c0LzEV2C79RYmrM9Ljd8Ltw== X-Received: by 2002:aa7:d955:: with SMTP id l21mr19781319eds.179.1570901868913; Sat, 12 Oct 2019 10:37:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Original-From: "Casper Ti. Vector" Mail-Followup-To: supervision@list.skarnet.org, skaware@list.skarnet.org, ska-supervision@skarnet.org Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190927083816.tectynx7dzlfcvb7@CasperVector> Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.comp.sysutils.supervision.general:2674 gmane.comp.sysutils.skaware:421 Archived-At: (I guess discussions about this document is probably destined to be off-topic on the skaware list, so further public mail in this thread will only be posted to the supervision list; sorry for the disturbance.) On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 04:38:16PM +0800, Casper Ti. Vector wrote: > Although the contents of the document are quite related to our mailing > lists, I do not think Laurent (by the way, I am sorry he might really > disagree with me on many points in the third part) would like to see too > much off-topic discussion on these lists. So please send comments to me > via private mail or GitLab/GitHub issues if they are unrelated to > supervision/skaware; I will be especially interested in comments about: I received comments and suggestions from multiple people, and would like to express my sincere gratitude to these people. Most of the issues involved either are quickly resolvable, or require more time to address but do not affect the main ideas expressed. However, there is one issue that I definitely need to ask for your suggestions on to resolve, and the issue is about systemd: multiple people told me that they felt uncomfortable about the recurring (but each time on a different aspect, obviously) examples about systemd. Before asking specifically for what I need, please allow me to briefly explain why the document is in its current shape. As can be seen from the Afterword and Footnote 44 (as of v0.1.1), this document originated from my reaction to the systemd fiasco; and as can be inferred from Section 11, I find it impossible to discuss UP2020 without major involvement with systemd. So I already intended to blame systemd when the document only existed in my imagination, and this intention is not unjustified; but once systemd is involved, any argument must be backed with enough evidences, hence the current shape of the document. However, people told me that the document is not quite accessible to those who know really little about systemd: one example is they do not even know much about how the modules are organised in systemd, so the claim that the systemd architecture has how cohesion and high coupling may seem unfounded; because of this, I request your recommendation for an accessible and not-too-boastful introduction to systemd suitable for citation in the document. Additionally, although there do not yet seem to be other major technical faults in the recurring systemd examples, they might really appear unpleasant for some readers, so I also request your advices on how to reduce the "rantiness" of the document (eg. how certain parts can be rephrased, or certain inessential examples be removed/replaced) without harming its technical correctness. A point to note is that I tried to choose a small yet most touted subset of systemd features, and then to analyse how these features can be done using s6 and friends, which I find a most efficient way to understand their nature. From what I know, there have been few systematic analyses of systemd from the viewpoint of the daemontools-ish design, so I believe that these technical arguments, in combination with UP2020, can be much more convincing than other arguments available in showing why systemd is bad. Consequently I think that, with an appropriate amount of publicity for the document, much more people would be willing to keep an eye on, migrate to, or even help develop daemontools-ish systems, potentially creating a mini-avalanche effect or even resulting in a turning point in the "init wars". However, the influx of people into our circle will also result in a lot of noise (especially the noise from some ill-intentioned systemd proponents) and a lot of additional technical workload, so I request Laurent for a decision on whether to publicise the document; and provided he agrees, I request you to help spread it to appropriate places. -- My current OpenPGP key: RSA4096/0x227E8CAAB7AA186C (expires: 2020.10.19) 7077 7781 B859 5166 AE07 0286 227E 8CAA B7AA 186C