On Sep 23, Lukas Märdian <sl...@debian.org> wrote: > As described in the "Proposal" section and first answer of the FAQ, it's all > about consistency. > > There seems to be a tendency for moving towards a hybrid stack, using > sd-networkd and NetworkManager in different contexts/use-cases. But having > fragmented ways of doing network configuration provides bad UX, as it can > confuse users, who first need to understand what sortf of Debian they are > using, before looking for solutions. The problem with this argument is that neither systemd-networkd, nor NetworkManager, nor ifupdown users are asking for a unified configuration system, which also happens to be different from what they are already used to.
> It's sad to see that fellow DDs do not seem to care about consistency > and usability in this regard. I think it's good that fellow DDs are wary of adding an indirection layer which nobody asked for. -- ciao, Marco
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
