Re: Flaming as a way to reach technical quality? No! (was: network-manager as default? No! (was: Bits from the Release Team - Kicking off Wheezy))
On Mon, 4 Apr 2011, Neil Williams <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> There needs to be a simple tool with few dependencies and there needs
> to be a complex solution with all the power that some users need. One
> tool does not suit all here. It's not just about daemon vs GUI frontend
> or whether to use DBus or Python - it's about having two or more tools
> which work together instead of one simple tool which gets side-stepped
> by a more complex tool because of a poor design.
It does seem likely that there won't be one tool that satisfies all
requirements. The current situation of giving users the choice of ifupdown,
NetworkManager, wicd, and probably other things seems good.
It doesn't seem likely that I would want NM on one of my servers. But having
it on my laptop and netbook would be good if it worked as desired. Last time
I tested NM it didn't work as desired - or at least not with the amount of
effort I was prepared to put into it.
If the plan is to depend more on NM in the next release then I'll probably
test it some more on a laptop running Unstable and file some bugs.
My Main Blog http://etbe.coker.com.au/
My Documents Blog http://doc.coker.com.au/