* Lukas Märdian <sl...@debian.org> [240923 07:05]: > 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. > > Netplan solves this and allows for providing common solution that work > across the system.
If we had a single network stack that provided a good user interface for all use cases, that would be great, but we don't anymore (ifupdown used to be that, a long time ago, which is one of the reasons it is still around). Adding a "compatibility layer" that gives a common user interface on top of multiple different network stacks does not make sense. The people that _might_ benefit from this fall into two basic categories: novices and the people who need to configure networking on many different systems. Novices are going to accept the default network stack on a desktop system. They are unlikely to care about networking on any system other than ones with a desktop installed, and they are only going to use the GUI provided by the desktop system. They will completely ignore the "compatibility layer". If they are forced to use a system without their favorite GUI network widget installed, they will have to learn a second network stack, whether it is another "native" stack or the "compatibility layer". _No benefit!_ People who need to configure networking on many different systems need to learn multiple network stacks, period. Having the "compatibility layer" as a default, rather than a forced mandatory, means that enough people with more than a beginner's knowledge of networking are going to choose the stack more suited to the purpose of their particular installation, uninstalling or ignoring the "compatibility layer", to make it necessary for anyone doing networking on a variety of systems to learn multiple stacks. Adding one more _unnecessary_ "compatibility layer" is just one more stack to learn. _No benefit!_ I think you realize what would happen if you proposed making netplan a "forced mandatory" compatibility layer! Please, can we drop this proposal and this thread? ...Marvin
