marianarlt wrote technology itself is driven by business and enterprise level decisions.
...ok but everytime you go criticizing one of those "linux" projects, they tell you (as autoresponse) this is free software created on developers' free time and those that do the development get to have a say and a choice on what to do. So is it or is it not driven by money and corporate-industrial-state interests?
.... your logic also defies some premises of deduction, just because something IS driven does that mean it SHOULD be? CAN it be otherwise? Why not? Or why should it?
Ok, after I started this shit thinking that pacman's development was overseen by Eric and J-M, and after j-m's alert on what zstd is and whether we are going to get it in our face in a few days/weeks/months, I decided after reading a little bit to go back to the previous pacman, which meant bringing some other things back too, and rebuilding some things and cheating them (like telling yay it depends on pacman 5.1 and above, not 5.2 and above) but how serious is this situation I can not comprehend. It is definitely alarming and it is one of those arch/debian switches where there is not going to be much discussion or explanations on the why, "because we want it that way and we don't have to explain it".
Ok, I take off and go to void, with which I have been familiar for a couple of years, and for which xbps is hard to digest after getting used to the flexibility of pacman, but the flexibility is there too you just have to adjust and learn it. Who says that 2-3 weeks later or 3-4 months later void doesn't adopt it as well? Void has about 9 architectures it supports, and this x2, glibc and musl, so almost every package is built 18 times, if they can save 3% of builder energy used, it is a significant part of the electrical bill (void still doesn't have a donate button, or a legal entity or a legal way to receive money in the name of void - they have been working on it - they don't even have a forum anymore, someone had it and took it down with him). Void did employ elogind as a good thing they weren't going to live without, they still have consolekit2, they haven't published an iso in more than a year I think, there is a community edition floating around, void did suddenly kick out gksu from the repositories, same lame excuse with other systems exommunicating this elogind competitor. So who and how is driving all this uniformalization universalization of linux systems? Linus has been adopting newer and newer hardware support and to keep the size down he keeps kicking older and older hw out of it ... 3.16 and 4.4 are still LTS, so we have to give them some credit.