Re: systemd .service file conversion

[Uoti Urpala <uoti.urpala@pp1.inet.fi>]

Russ Allbery wrote:
> Uoti Urpala <uoti.urpala@pp1.inet.fi> writes:
> > Marc Haber wrote:
> >> And it is still completely inferior even to dpkg-conffile handling,
> >> which has huge wishes left open as well.
> 
> > False. The message you replied to already listed advantages over
> > dpkg-conffile handling. This was also already discussed before:
> > https://lists.debian.org/<1336580040.28230.9.camel@glyph.nonexistent.invalid>
> 
> We've had this discussion a lot.  There is an ongoing technical
> disagreement of opinion about the tradeoffs.

While there is room for reasonable disagreement about the relative
benefits of different configuration setups, "completely inferior even to
dpkg-conffile handling" is not part of any reasonable disagreement. That
claim is simply false.

>   Pointing out that you've
> previously posted your side of the argument isn't any more likely to
> change anyone's mind than it did when you posted it the first time.  The
> people who disagreed with your arguments the first time are still going to

I did not post the link to "point out I've previously posted my side",
but to avoid repeating the same discussion again. To show what the
benefits are without posting the same thing a second time, and to
generally show that there already was a discussion about this topic
before. I doubt everyone remembers a discussion from a year ago even if
they did read it at the time, and it's not obvious to what degree Marc
Haber himself was aware of it; at least he did not participate in that
discussion.