[04:24] So, how long do you think until Ubuntu switches to systemd? [09:34] systemd is just upstart reinvented isn't it? [09:35] because upstart was written by Canonical [09:54] some argue systemd is technically superior. [09:55] probably is [09:57] I'm unconvinced it's NiH [09:58] but would Canonical be able to switch to it? [09:58] or is there too much emotional investment in upstart? [09:59] like bzr/git or unity/gnome-shell [10:02] i dont think its emotional investment which prevents us going bzr -> git, or unity -> gnome shell [10:02] same for upstart -> systemd [10:02] for unity there's the belief it's better, for our long term plans [10:02] for bzr I suspect it's because we have nobody to do the migration work [10:11] popey: What do you think is preventing a move from upstart to systemd? [10:19] One thing I find odd is that while there are many detailed technical arguments given for systemd over upstart, I haven't been able to find any equivelant defense of upstart over systemd. [10:22] The closest thing I've seen (and it's not very close at all) is from http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/1121 . Did the Ubuntu Foundations team mentioned by Mark make a public report on what they deemed were the technical (and social) problems with systemd, and the technical (and social) advantages of upstart? [10:28] I've not seen such a public report. I've seen it discussed on ubuntu-devel iirc