Re: 9p/plumber to replace D-Bus?
On Wednesday, December 10, 2014 10:10:05 PM UTC+5:30, Marty wrote:
> On 12/08/2014 09:12 AM, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> > On Monday 08 December 2014 13:18:18 Marty wrote:
> >> I would even deign to
> >> give users a choice in the matter,
> > [snip]
> >> Multi-seat PC and other
> >> anachronisms probably have to go away.
> >
> > Choice???
> >
> > Lisi
>
> The industry and its plans for FOSS is strongly anti-choice:
> https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2008-January/msg00861.html
>
> I'm looking for a solution to that, not make it worse.
Have you heard of "Paradox of choice"?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Paradox_of_Choice
I guess that I dont disagree with your conclusion -- only the 'choice' logic.
See below.
>
> This biggest issues I see at this point are non-technical, some
> political, some based on ignorance of the history of the
> computer industry and all of the fundamental technical issues
> surrounding it. I consider debian-user to have a better than
> average grasp of technical issues, but the confusion surrounding the
> systemd debate shrouded the issues here too, as it did elsewhere.
>
> People who are happy with their computer environments and don't see
> the issues and trends as problematic in any way, have my respect, even
> envy at this moment. I feel the same way as I did when RMS announced GNU
> and remember trying to decide how or if this will ever affect me, while
> listening to the "lively" office debates it inspired. It saw it as
> something that might even work. This time, I don't see a solution, a way
> forward, and that worries me. It's like the GNU announcement in reverse.
>
> Protecting Debian modularity and the Debian ports is a big issue that
> probably should not be left to package maintainers and the Technical
> Committee. It's their job, in a sense, but recent events prove that
> can't do it alone, and they (we users, Debian) are competing against
> paid devs and industrial development. I wish I had the answer, and I
> wish even there was consensus that this problem ever exists.
Well in general the paradox of choice says that too much choice
can be a bad thing.
However in the case of systemd (or systemd in Debian-Jessie) the
answer was clearly a small increase in choice -- go from a
fixed init to a default but choose-able one -- a new choice in the installer.
When one compares the extent of heat generated by these arguments
to the tiny increase of nuisance to a user having to choose an
init-system at install-time I am left incredulous...
Reply to: