LWN: Comments on "Colin Watson resigns from Debian Technical Committee"

Yes, it is civil

tfx2 — Fri, 21 Nov 2014 17:27:46 +0000

Please don't blame mental illness for bad behavior. There are plenty of people with mental illness who are not engaging in the harassment of people associated with the systemd project.

Accommodating people with mental illness doesn't mean that you have to accommodate toxic behavior, and eliminating toxic behavior is actually a pretty good accommodation. If harassment and trolling was far less common, we would have greater participation in open source, and it would remove one source of stress that contributes to burnout.

Yes, it is civil

namreh — Thu, 20 Nov 2014 03:34:51 +0000

I think that one of the problems with computer science in general and FOSS especially, is that a substantial number of contributers and users are mentally ill / unstable. This makes it hard on the rest of the contributers and users who have to accommodate them.

Refactoring and improving the init system is the easy part.

Colin Watson resigns from Debian Technical Committee

halla — Wed, 19 Nov 2014 21:19:33 +0000

Well, the "lens of experience" is a really dangerous thing. It's way too easy to drop into the "we done that in the seventies, it ain't gonna work, no way" mode about things that might, superficially seem to be like something you've seen before, but, actually, aren't.

I've been coding since the early eighties and I've seen all the trends since then, and yes, I often feel that, oh gosh -- X is just Y, don't they ever learn. And then I discover that I was wrong. Even with applications and operating systems having live spans beyond twenty years or even more, the actual problems change, the actual user demands change, and software that survives has to change, too.

In short, experience is fine, but viewing the world through "the lens of experience" is exceedingly dumb.

Colin Watson resigns from Debian Technical Committee

tjc — Wed, 19 Nov 2014 20:11:26 +0000

> In the aggregate, first generation community members are not as active as we once were, and yet we can have a hard time relating to a new generation who never knew a world before Linux and who do not see existing solutions and compromises through the same lens of experience that brought us here.

This is the reason I keep one foot in the Amiga community, despite the fact that the platform has not really been viable for decades.

Yes, it is civil

mstone_ — Wed, 19 Nov 2014 19:55:59 +0000

Wow. If you have something substantive to say, just say it and stop acting the martyr. This might be a really great time to just start a new distribution, as the debian developers have made it pretty clear that they want this time-wasting nonsense to stop. We'll have two init systems for jessie. If people keep maintaining both of them, we'll keep two init systems after jessie. If one turns out to not be useful it'll get dropped. We can just deal with it, without the drama. It seems as though you've said what you wanted to say, and have convinced those that you are likely to convince. What's the point in continuing to pick at it? If you're right, the project will dump systemd at some point in the future and do something else. If you want to help make things better, find a way to contribute. If you just want to complain, start a new distro built around whatever it is that you stand for these days that you think the debian developers are too stupid to figure out.

For the record, I hated systemd also, but now I don't want to be associated with the anti-systemd crowd and would rather support it than just sit and whine. Some of my machines have systemd, some have sysvinit.

Yes, it is civil

BrucePerens — Wed, 19 Nov 2014 19:40:14 +0000

That was my exact observation of the state of the discussion.

Now, I am sure that systemd folks have had no lack of vitriol in their direction. But it was and remains my observation that there is a juggernaut of software change presented by the systemd team, some of which has merit and the rest less. And it's perfectly valid to stand up and say "do we really need this?". But what I got was criticism = hate, criticism = bad behavior, criticism = oh what a pity that Bruce has gone so low.

OK, I have had any number of people attempt to use emotional tactics to demotivate me, and I pretty much know what to do by now. Which is mostly ignore it. And I got what I needed for this discussion, which was all of the speaking points for an editorial in another venue. The people have been polled and some of them were even worth representing.

And yes, I still think it's mad.

Anyone who criticizes systemd has a character flaw

zlynx — Wed, 19 Nov 2014 19:12:19 +0000

These bootup issues are a big reason that (in my opinion) embedded ARM systems are so refreshing. They have none of that baggage. The boot loader and operating system are customized for the hardware. Flip the reset and the CPU starts executing YOUR code instead of flipping though three different ancient compatibility modes first.

And some people think we need to add ACPI to ARM? I think they're crazy.

X.Org and Wayland

Wol — Wed, 19 Nov 2014 18:02:27 +0000

Note that the X11 devs (Keith Packard in particular) view Wayland as a sort of X13 (X12 already exists).

The reason the X -> Wayland transition is proceeding smoothly is that there are no longer any X developers left - they've all moved to Wayland BUT. They take their responsibilities as X maintainers seriously.

Which is why "Wayland on X" is an important development focus, and they see "X on Wayland" as a very important transition mode. And why X and Wayland play nicely together ...

Cheers,
Wol

Colin Watson resigns from Debian Technical Committee

namreh — Wed, 19 Nov 2014 17:19:17 +0000

Thank you Bruce for your hard work over the years and trying to keep Debian on track. It sure seems like an uphill battle at the moment.

Please keep to the high road and ignore the invective that keeps bubbling up out of the bitrot in the bilge tubes of the internet.

Anyone who criticizes systemd has a character flaw

nix — Wed, 19 Nov 2014 17:08:55 +0000

It also doesn't explain why it hampers innovation any more than having a standard set of any other APIs, say, like POSIX, or libc in general, or libX11, or the GNOME or KDE APIs, hampers innovation. It's not as if switching out systemd's pieces is impossible: indeed, with the exception of PID 1 it's pretty easy.

The only problem, really, is that many (not all!) of those pieces seem to depend on PID 1 being systemd, and that's probably not impossible to solve: you'd just need to write another program (not necessarily PID 1) that did the same things systemd does with cgroups and DBus interfaces -- like, say, the already-existing systemd-shim. The argument must therefore be that systemd hampers innovation until someone makes a new program that mimics some of its behaviours, whereupon it suddenly would cease to hamper innovation without changing in any other sense, seems likely to be somewhat flawed. Particularly given that this program already exists.

Anyone who criticizes systemd has a character flaw

nix — Wed, 19 Nov 2014 17:03:40 +0000

Of course, just because hitting the power switch is simple doesn't mean that what it does in response is simple. Heck, what it does before running the OS is so terrifying that I'm amazed it ever gets anywhere. <http://resources.infosecinstitute.com/system-address-map-...> has a 'short' (read: way too long) primer.

Similarly, what happens after the OS boots has got more and more complex. Hence the need for things like systemd in the first place.

Colin Watson resigns from Debian Technical Committee

mstone_ — Wed, 19 Nov 2014 13:35:35 +0000

"As you can see, I found out this morning that anyone who criticizes systemd has a character flaw. It's not a technical or policy argument at all. You can't really even start talking about it without being criticized for the tone of your discussion.

This is mad, folks."

This was civil and made a reasonable case? You must define that differently than I do. That post was a classic troll. It added nothing substantive to the discussion, obliquely criticized some set of people, and invited them to make a similarly content-free rebuttal.

Anyone who criticizes systemd has a character flaw

vonbrand — Wed, 19 Nov 2014 09:49:26 +0000

Many "smaller fixes" where tried over the years, none stuck. Systemd is the first one in this area to get real traction (as in across most distributions, even being embraced by the whole range from embedded though server and workstations). One has to wonder why... the Linux crowd being a individualistic, stubborn bunch of people, not so easily swayed by random marketing nonsense, should make you wonder why, and look further than conspiracy theories.

Anyone who criticizes systemd has a character flaw

niner — Wed, 19 Nov 2014 09:42:29 +0000

Repeating the same claim over and over does not explain _why_ systemd's design supposedly hampers innovation.

Anyone who criticizes systemd has a character flaw

mgb — Wed, 19 Nov 2014 09:07:48 +0000

Git doesn't hamper innovation.

Systemd's monolithically entangled design hampers innovation.

Anyone who criticizes systemd has a character flaw

smurf — Wed, 19 Nov 2014 08:52:33 +0000

Please explain why having everything in one git repository you can freely clone and modify and whatnot, as opposed to ten git repositories …, hampers innovation.

Please explain why that should even be a problem, given the fact that almost all of the protocols involved are completely open. So is the process of developing them; it's not as if Lennart just shakes his head vigorously and the dbus spec for timedated falls out of his left ear.

X.Org and Wayland

mjthayer — Wed, 19 Nov 2014 08:23:19 +0000

> if I have to spend time updating GTK+ to something modern, I'd probably spend it improving Wayland, instead of supporting yet another band aid on top of X. others may feel differntly motivated. what does not help is thinking "we can fix X11 with just another extension", because that was we thought about COMPOSITE as well, and look at where that misplaced trust led us.

Don't get me wrong here: I am not advocating either way. On the one hand I am just observing that Wayland still seems to be in a process of maturing to cope with a lot of real life situations, and wondering whether it will still be quite as simple and clean once it has come to maturity. And on the other I am wondering how many of X11's issues will have been solved well enough in creative ways by that time, and whether at that point Wayland will still have enough impetus to replace the "just good enough" X server, which will likely by that time act much more like Wayland with Xwayland on top anyway.

Not saying that my wondering will make it so either of course, but curious to see.

Anyone who criticizes systemd has a character flaw

notninjaz — Wed, 19 Nov 2014 04:43:57 +0000

I'm not a current FreeBSD user. Back then, I switched to OpenBSD for most things I was doing and DragonflyBSD for another. I'm currently only using RHEL for Linux except a couple of eval systems running SLES.

The point I was hoping to make was that when a group figures out it's not one group, but actually two groups, it is usually most beneficial to just separate and pursue whatever it is that inspires each of the groups rather than resorting to brutal attacks in an effort to achieve something that looks like unity.

Colin Watson resigns from Debian Technical Committee

BrucePerens — Wed, 19 Nov 2014 04:33:25 +0000

Really nice writing. And I don't have a clue who you are. Do you mind if I use some of these points in another venue? Thanks!

Anyone who criticizes systemd has a character flaw

BrucePerens — Wed, 19 Nov 2014 04:19:28 +0000

There are two kinds of "marketing". Strategic marketing and marketing communications. Marketing communications is all of that advertising. And yes, Apple has done a lot. But the failure of the Linux desktop so far is not a matter of its not being advertised (after all, we have "viral" phenomena that work as advertising without the money these days). It's a matter of strategic marketing, and ultimately that comes down to understanding the user and what will motivate the user.

And no, this doesn't mean we have to discard those inconvenient principles, even if they cause annoying discussions. Having them is indeed our only hope of differentiation from those other products.

Anyone who criticizes systemd has a character flaw

rahulsundaram — Wed, 19 Nov 2014 04:18:26 +0000

>But this would have taken a smaller fix than what we are currently presented with.

Some claim that but so far noone has even bothered to show the fix they have in mind. If it is so simple, why not show it?

Anyone who criticizes systemd has a character flaw

BrucePerens — Wed, 19 Nov 2014 04:12:39 +0000

Init inherits children of exited processes. But I get your point that starting it with a shell script that then exits isn't a good way to catch the pid, and anything that recovered the pid from a lock file or something at that point would be grotesque.

I accept that doing the same job of starting a daemon from 100 subtly different shell scritps is a bad idea.

But this would have taken a smaller fix than what we are currently presented with.

Anyone who criticizes systemd has a character flaw

mgb — Wed, 19 Nov 2014 02:14:27 +0000

Android is an important application of Linux that was made possible by the Unix Philosophy. But Android itself is monolithic and therefore not the future of Linux.

Systemd too was made possible by the Unix Philosophy. But systemd itself is an entangled monolith and therefore not the future of Linux. Systemd might remain a critical component of the Gnome/KDE world but the Gnome/KDE world will then always remain an insignificant fraction of the Linux world.

If Linux Desktop ever succeeds as Linux Server and Linux Embedded and Linux Mobile have succeeded, it will be via a route that supports innovation, not via a systemd monolith that raises barriers to innovation.

Anyone who criticizes systemd has a character flaw

ebassi — Wed, 19 Nov 2014 01:40:28 +0000

Linux successes derive from the Unix Philosophy which enables innovation. Monolithically entangled systemd is the opposite.

this is monumentally wrong on various levels already, but the cherry on top is the mention of Android. newsflash: Android is very much monolithic — and it's getting even more calcified with each release, now that Google is trying to rein it the whole ecosystem.

you clearly have absolutely no idea what are you talking about.

Anyone who criticizes systemd has a character flaw

jspaleta — Wed, 19 Nov 2014 00:59:58 +0000

Leaving it as a sysvinit script only might be the best course of action, I was considering suggesting that actually.

But as the attempt was started to convert it over and fedora already had a converted unit file.. I was going to assume there was a need for it to work as a native unit config.

-jef

Anyone who criticizes systemd has a character flaw

johannbg — Wed, 19 Nov 2014 00:52:04 +0000

Hmm why dont you just leave the legacy sysv initscript as is if the intent is to give the admins some "breathing room" and they just continue to use that?

When they are ready to advance themselves they simply use the built in watchdog feature.

But have at it if you think this serves some purpose...

Anyone who criticizes systemd has a character flaw

jspaleta — Wed, 19 Nov 2014 00:12:23 +0000

I'm actually trying to redo the units from scratch. I'm not trying to keep the existing units because of the problems there.

With regard to systemd's watchdog.. I think the idea is making sure...if admins migrating existing systems to jessie have made a self-determination that they want the existing watchdog to work until such time as they can transition their local config to using systemd's watchdog confidently... then the watchdog service should still work for them during that transition.

I don't think there's a clean way to automate that transition for admins. I think there's going to be a real need to help admins keep their existing watchdog service working so they can be confident in transitioning to systemd's watchdog. I think this is probably most true for local service inits that are going to still be using sysvinit until the local admin transitions those over and not inits in the debian repo and make use of the systemd servie lifetime management to take action on service crashes and whatnot.

So for me really this is about given those admins some breathing room and time to transition any local configs they need over to systemd so they learn to use systemd's native units for service management including the FailureActions directives displacing watchdog's software supervision role.

Anyone who criticizes systemd has a character flaw

johannbg — Tue, 18 Nov 2014 23:46:17 +0000

I'm not sure where to begin actually after looking into that bug

EnvironmentFile=/etc/default/watchdog <---

Calling an environmental file to load an environmental used later in the unit is a no no and obsoleted regardless if it's called /etc/default/foo ( Debian ) or /etc/sysconfig/bar ( Fedora )

Admins overwrite package default configuration entries either via conf snippets or a copy of a full blown units in /etc/systemd/system so there is no need for that "Say YES","Say NO" or OPTIONS="" which these files usually consist of.

Let's take the next ugly line

ExecStartPre=/bin/sh -c '[ -z "${watchdog_module}" ] || [ "${watchdog_module}" = "none" ] || echo /sbin/modprobe $watchdog_module'

For the first you dont escape to shell in units, secondly you dont load modules with units either, you drop a module load snipped into /etc/modules-load.d/<foo>.conf or better yet built it into the kernel

But if you insist on ignoring what I said here above create a shells script and call that instead of escaping and if you are going to be loading a module at least be nice about it

ExecStartPre=-/sbin/modprobe -qab <foo>

And never unload a module in a unit yes that means never.

Unloading modules is a debuging/developer/testing tool and most certainly should not be done during shutdown of the unit.

Now since you are in communication with him I want you ask him this.

Are you going to be using systemd in your Debian instalment?

If the answer to that is yes then ask him if he simply cant use the built in hardware and software ( for units ) watchdog support that comes with systemd?

That built in watchdog support has been there since the ages and was implemented you know for that embedded/server crowd which some people have apparently stated on numerous occasions does not use systemd.

Yes we are aware that/dev/watchdog is single-user only and it defaults to off in systemd so an separate external watchdog daemon, ( such as watchdog ) can be used ( nobody is removing choices here ).

That takes care of his ( the reporter ) problem but not the said maintainer(s) one(s) since what we are seeing here above ( which is the guts of that hackish unit outlined in that bug report ) is a complete fallout from the gorilla warfare that has been taking place in the Debian community namely distracting it from forming solid packaging policy, separating ( on a package level ) the $other-inits functionality ( which the I want to support every init system out there has to arguably come up with ) and systemd.

Now the watchdog maintainer needs to support either two packages or broken integration with systemd in the form of hackish units containing environmental files which may or may not have to load modules and what not.

Btw this can simply be a ( race ) bug as well which we found out [1] when we migrated stuff like this in Fedora

1. http://svn.savannah.gnu.org/viewvc/trunk/bmc-watchdog/bmc...

Colin Watson resigns from Debian Technical Committee

julian67 — Tue, 18 Nov 2014 23:15:01 +0000

I'm a long time non-subscriber, non-member but regular reader of LWN. I finally created an account to add some comments. Here goes:

Thank you Bruce Perens, for remaining civil and for making a reasonable case and continuing to do so while it seems your rather easily parsed sentences are wilfully misinterpreted, misrepresented and misconstrued, all while you are subject to being sluiced with enough mud to create a planet, apparently because some of it is bound to stick.

I am a Debian user. I'm not a sysadmin or CTO of some fabulous tech enterprise, or an employee of anyone with a dog in this fight, just a regular user who has a Debian Stable server and various Debian Testing desktops and laptops. This means I'm running an olde worlde sysv-init stable server and also machines which use systemd. I don't have an allergy.

What I really dislike falls into two categories:

first is the brazen hypocrisy of posts such as https://lwn.net/Articles/621426/ where Mr Perens is vilified for supposedly committing the crime of the logical fallacy of "appeal to authority" *accompanied* by a slew of personal insults ("..uneducated, short-sighted ... credibility is rather questionable.... stuck in the past, unwilling to see today's problems..)

This is the grossest hypocrisy. But I suppose the invective and poison might serve to distract from the fact that BP was not advocating an "appeal to authority", but merely suggesting that life experience can bring insight and might be regarded as a valuable resource, not just a ghastly and unavoidable mechanism for the manifestation of grey hair and piles and ulcers (can you tell I'm not young?).

I don't think it's disgraceful that BP is articulating his concerns in a civil and reasoned way in places and in situations that are absolutely relevant. I do think it's disgraceful that a handful of people who apparently are not even Debian users, let alone developers, bark like dogs at him whenever he does so. Four legs good, two systemd legs better.

The other thing I really dislike is software that is designed to break other software. If people want/need to create an init system that will, by design or knowing indifference, damage or coerce other free software projects (i.e. the BSDs) then how can that software be the default in Debian? If it fits Fedora or RHEL or Suse, fine. But Debian is not Fedora, it is not RH and it is not Suse.

Anyone who criticizes systemd has a character flaw

paulj — Tue, 18 Nov 2014 22:29:33 +0000

No they didn't.

You've completely misparsed Bruce's comments, AFAICT. Apple never ditched X from the Unix stack they bought, as it was never there for them to ditch to begin with.

Anyone who criticizes systemd has a character flaw

jspaleta — Tue, 18 Nov 2014 21:52:46 +0000

768168
Specifically this message is details the jumping in point that I was interested in trying to help with:
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=768168#60

I haven't actually proposed anything on the bug yet..I'm having a sidebar conversation in email at the moment, doing so testing on my fedora box. If you have the time and have suggestions on how to get the necessary functionality encoded I think that would be great..

The fedora watchdog units don't cover the situation where transiton to wd-keepalive is needed as far as I can tell.

main issue: How to gracefully handling falling back and running wd-keepalive when kernels are so configured to ignore the device close that watchdog does.

The existing deb initscript starts wd-keepalive when watchdog service is stopped if the watchdog config file says keepalive should be running if watchdog isn't.

So.. under sysv init wd-keepalive gets started conditionally when watchdog is manually stopped..but also as a result early in the shutdown process as the sysvinit stop function gets called then as well. Because for such configured kernels if watchdog is stopped early in shutdown.

Wrinkle the first.. watchdog needs to be started "late enough" if configured to watch other services. if watchdog starts too early before those services it will think they are dead and do its watchdog magic inappropriately. So yeah basically a race. if all watched services have systemd units with correct Before=watchdog using local admin overrides in /etc/systemd/ as per best systemd practises, then watchdog should start late enough without any issue. But if some of those services are started by sysvinit compat and not by systemd units can a watchdog unit be prepped that runs late enough as a catchall for watched sysvinit services? And Which is to be expected for people upgrading to a systemd init in jessie I think.

Wrinkle the second...watchdog needs to be taken down early in shutdown before any watched services are dropped and wd-keepalive needs to conditional run in its place. Can we get a special early shutdown unit to do that conditionally starts up wd-keepalive and conflicts with watchdog?

-jef

Anyone who criticizes systemd has a character flaw

johannbg — Tue, 18 Nov 2014 21:29:28 +0000

The bug number?

Anyone who criticizes systemd has a character flaw

notninjaz — Tue, 18 Nov 2014 21:21:38 +0000

Zack,

I'm actually not overly concerned about what happens with Debian, since it's a distribution that I don't use and don't plan on using in the future. i think open discussion about individual distributions and their goals can only benefit the Linux community in general, though.

If anything, Debian's adoption of systemd would benefit me, as Debian users tend to actually use the current release while enterprise Linux customers usually want a year or few before doing anything important with a new major release.

Anyone who criticizes systemd has a character flaw

jspaleta — Tue, 18 Nov 2014 21:20:35 +0000

Sadly LWN doesn't really cover qnx or android so much so you are correct.

I'm actually currently trying to help one Deb maintainer craft a more optional systemd native init and close a Debian bug. But I'll probably just make it worse.

-jef

Anyone who criticizes systemd has a character flaw

jspaleta — Tue, 18 Nov 2014 21:13:19 +0000

You know, there's a wide gap between arguing sincerely for more loose coupling between subprojects and being a proponent of Balkansian of a project. A wide gap.

Anyways, as a current FreeBSD user I hope you are looking forward with excitement to the continued development of systembsd and its future integration into your current operating system of choice.

-jef

Anyone who criticizes systemd has a character flaw

Zack — Tue, 18 Nov 2014 21:09:42 +0000

You're obviously very concerned about Debian, and specifically and repeatedly the effects of systemd adoption in Debian, and with everybody involved in it. There's also a lot of concern about Ubuntu's doings, in general.

So much concern in posts about distributions you don't actually use. Maybe that's just in your nature: to be a very concerning person.

Anyone who criticizes systemd has a character flaw

mgb — Tue, 18 Nov 2014 21:08:19 +0000

> Well, I'd expect at a *technical* level to see significant pushback from DE projects against relying on tooling like logind.

Gnome and KDE are having great fun with their experiments - which is their right as volunteers - and continuously shedding disgruntled users as a result.

Linux is the most widely used O/S overall. It is also the leader on servers and mobile. Gnome and KDE have gotten nowhere.

Linux successes derive from the Unix Philosophy which enables innovation. Monolithically entangled systemd is the opposite. Android ignores systemd and the pushback you're seeing against systemd is from Linux's other success story - server sysadmins.

Anyone who criticizes systemd has a character flaw

notninjaz — Tue, 18 Nov 2014 20:59:23 +0000

jef,

After using Debian, I started using FreeBSD for non-enterprise servers. That community had a similar disagreement to this one which led to the DragonflyBSD fork. I consider that as a positive development compared to accusing people of racism over disagreements about technical direction.

When I stopped using Debian, it was because it had become clear to me that it was first and foremost a social activity for its developers. I ended up using Mandrake because it supported the video cards on the market at the time after the one in my workstation died, even though I would have preferred something like Ubuntu (ie., Debian for Use Cases)

For my part, I think good judgement is timeless and not tied to the question of the day, and I'm grateful for Bruce's involvement. It's apparent that he knew what he was getting into by offering anything but praise for systemd and the fact that he still got involved is commendable as I see it.

Anyone who criticizes systemd has a character flaw

rodgerd — Tue, 18 Nov 2014 20:49:38 +0000

>> I fail to see much real evidence of that "lot of people".

> so what would you consider 'real evidence'?

Well, I'd expect at a *technical* level to see significant pushback from DE projects against relying on tooling like logind. I'd expect to see many distributions choosing *not* to implement systemd. I'd expect to see a lot more people who, like you, have criticisms derived from meangingful attempts to use systemd.

Instead it's a fairly small echo chamber of the same handful of people making noise across a common set of online forums. And the people who do work that copuld be affected positively or negatively by systemd are mostly adtoping it (as programmers or distro maintainers).

Anyone who criticizes systemd has a character flaw

jspaleta — Tue, 18 Nov 2014 20:44:29 +0000

People change.

Can you imagine that 1999 version of said person encouraging deliberate Balkanization of any development community? Deliberate creation of smaller groups who are openly hostile to each other, as a positive thing to see?

I can't. I actually can't fathom anyone who is thinking rationally to want to see that. But you know my family is actually from the Balkans, and chose to flee to the US to avoid exactly the hostility. Maybe I just have a different perspective...as in I still have a modicum of compassion and empathy.

No matter how systemd is being managed or constructed I would never, ever, ever wish "Balkanization" on any community or project and the hostility inherent therein.And I pity the human being who has reached the point in their life where they feel creating a pervasive hostility between sub-communities with more similarities than differences is the preferred approach as a open development model. It's one thing to agree to disagree, and to be civil about making space for that disagreement, but to prefer open hostility? And to prefer to take a project with active development and to create internal hostility? That's just... terrible. To want to see more fighting and less cooperation.. less consensus? Is this the person you talked to in 1999?

Whomever existed in 1999 is not the person that is talking now in 2014.
Maybe he's recently been replaced by a Skrull. I actually hope that's the case. Because if he has been replaced by a Skrull, we might be able to get the original Bruce back if we could just find where he's being kept.

-jef