* Marc Haber <mh+debian-de...@zugschlus.de> [240922 13:08]: > On Sun, 22 Sep 2024 12:22:50 +0200, Chris Hofstaedtler > <z...@debian.org> wrote: > >The "server" group supposedly wants (and I agree) networkd, > >but they also want the configuration interface of networkd. > > Ack. I'd love networkd to have some more robustness features, but > netplan doesnt add anything here. > > >The "laptop" group supposedly wants (and I agree) NetworkManager, > >but they also want the configuration interface of NetworkManager. > > nack. I truly despise the configuration interface of NetworkManager, > and I have never fully understood it. I still have NetworkManager on > my notebooks because it interfaces nicely with the clickable frontends > in the desktop environment.
TBH the "interfaces nicely with the clickable frontends" part is what I meant here. I don't know if anyone likes nm-cli. When I use NetworkManager on a desktop or laptop, then it is through one of the GUI frontends. I assume this is what people want. > Will I continue to have that luxury if we have netplan above n-m? Very good question. As far as I understood Lukas' mail, then at least currently not, as NM in Debian doesn't come with patches to support two-way configuration with netplan. I would understand if the NetworkManager maintainers in Debian don't want to apply them as a Debian patch; without having looked at the patches, the whole objective sounds like the patches would be quite intrusive. > I am all for d-i pre-choosing sane defaults for workstation/notebook > setups. The server people are likely to use the expert install, have > preseeded installs or their completely own installation methods. As pointed out by Simon, this is already done depending on the desktop selection. Which I didn't know, but sounds like the sane thing to do! Chris
