[arch-general] Arch's move to systemd integration

[Myra Nelson]

On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 3:38 AM, Paul Gideon Dann <pdgiddie at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sunday 22 Jul 2012 15:14:13 Myra Nelson wrote:
>> My comparison to file size was meant to be extended to the complete
>> removal of rc.d and conf.d or the removal of several files in those
>> directories. Maybe that concept is not that important. I didn't mean
>> to imply the KISS principle was about size, just trying to imply this
>> change doesn't necessarily violate that principle.
>
> When I read about file sizes, my immediate thought was that it's being used as
> a metric for simplicity of configuration.  Did noone else think this?  If the
> configuration file sizes are small, this might indicate that it won't be a
> nightmare to configure.
>
>> My main argument
>> was "If I can get this done anyone can. It's not that much different,
>> it's just different". It appears to me to be just as portable as the
>> current setup and it might just save the Devs some time, and provide
>> better integration with upstream devs. Another salient point is just
>> because it's been done that way since Moses was a baby doesn't make it
>> right. Sorry if I offend anyone.
>
> Thank you for sharing this Myra; I think this is a helpful argument.  The
> lesson seems to be: systemd is not difficult to use; it's just new, shiny, and
> different.  Don't be scared of it.
>
> As for me, I haven't made the switch yet mainly because I haven't had the time
> to look into it properly.
>
> Paul

Paul:

A voice of reason in the darkness. The size comparisons were a silly
comparison to such BS in another thread about systemd. You seem to be
the only one who picked up on the central point of my argument. If a
half brain dead old woman can do this with minimal problems the
younger generation shouldn't have any problem with it.

Thank you very much.

Myra

-- 
Life's fun when your sick and psychotic!