←back to thread

466 points CoolCold | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.225s | source
Show context
akagusu ◴[] No.40212609[source]
Piece by piece, Red Hat is taking over the Linux ecosystem.
replies(5): >>40212643 #>>40212672 #>>40212743 #>>40214110 #>>40215580 #
izacus ◴[] No.40212672[source]
Well, they're the only ones actually funding development of the ecosystem, aren't they?

The rest just do a lot of opinoning and complaining and not that much of developing.

replies(1): >>40212699 #
superkuh ◴[] No.40212699[source]
The implicit premise of this comment is that linux is broken and needs to be changed. It isn't. The changes are not inherently good. Development is not inherently good. Just look at Gtk3 from 2014 to 2024. It was far more functional in 2014 (re: keyboard input) and now that has been removed because "progress".
replies(2): >>40212834 #>>40212902 #
throwaway11460 ◴[] No.40212834[source]
Nobody needs to adopt the changes. Everybody did because it's better than the alternatives. There are still systemd-less distros if you like it.
replies(2): >>40213000 #>>40213696 #
superkuh ◴[] No.40213000[source]
My issue is not with systemd. My issue is with the argument that all development is good. In this example I am pointing out how Gtk3 has suffered from development attention from GNOME over the last decade and became worse.

Maybe run0 is worse than sudo. Maybe not. I have no personal experience on that topic and I doubt anyone here does.

replies(1): >>40213493 #
throwaway11460 ◴[] No.40213493[source]
It's the same thing though - nobody is forced to accept their changes, you can fork at any time. Or stop using it, keep using gtk2, etc.
replies(1): >>40214127 #
1. immibis ◴[] No.40214127[source]
Reality is more nuanced than that, because even if the newer software is worse, if it markets itself better it can persuade other projects to drop support for the old software.