On Sun, 4 Nov 2007 12:48:35 -0800 Jason Chu <jason@archlinux.org> wrote:
I'm going to jump on this bandwagon for a minute...
I just read your concern and it was "I dislike the idea to make it more complex just for eyecandy". Do you or have you ever maintained initscripts? Have you ever submitted a patch or fixed a bug to do with them? If not, then why does it matter how complex something gets if it just works for what you need it to do?
The people who do maintain it and fix the bugs *do* want the patch. Who are you to say whether it's too complex for them or not? Why not say, "thank you for writing the patch, I'm sure that lots of people will be very happy that things have become easier for them"?
Jason
No, I have never maintain or send bugfixes to initscripts. You are right, it's not my problem, because other must maintain it. In my opinion it isn't worth to add it anyway, because it is just eyecandy. But if Thomas or anybody else getting it done without any side effects for users who don't have activate splash, go on and add splash support in initscripts. Or in your words: "thank you for writing the patch, I'm sure that lots of people will be very happy that things have become easier for them" ;) +1 from me (IF everything is running fine for users without activated splash, because that's the default of booting archlinux (and I hope it will be the default option in the future)). Daniel