Tweet
Originally posted by doom_Oo7
View Post
The upstart and libnih code bases are beautiful pieces of work. I was
quite impressed by the code quality and documentation level, and more
impressed by the extensive test suite. upstart and libnih follow the
gold standard, commonly advocated but rarely met, of having around half
of the code in the package be test cases. These are clearly code bases
that have seen a great deal of love, care, and consistent development
standards. The systemd code base also struck me as solid and at the
standard that we would expect for a critical package, but the testing
model is not as comprehensive or as integrated with the code, and it
didn't impress me the same way that the upstart code did.
quite impressed by the code quality and documentation level, and more
impressed by the extensive test suite. upstart and libnih follow the
gold standard, commonly advocated but rarely met, of having around half
of the code in the package be test cases. These are clearly code bases
that have seen a great deal of love, care, and consistent development
standards. The systemd code base also struck me as solid and at the
standard that we would expect for a critical package, but the testing
model is not as comprehensive or as integrated with the code, and it
didn't impress me the same way that the upstart code did.
The main reasons systemd was chosen over upstart involved having more features and being widely adopted in the rest of the open-source ecosystem. (sidenote: I'm glad systemd was adopted by Ubuntu since it saves them some effort and helps increase compatibility between distros)
Comment