On Tue, 2015-12-15 at 01:53 +0530, Kushal Das wrote: > > > The thing is that it's almost impossible to say "if we just run all X > > tests, we can guarantee everything is fine!" in real life, especially > > at the level of something as complex as an entire OS networking stack. > > It's simply an unavoidable fact of life that the more network > > configuration stacks we have in mass usage, the more likely it is that > > there will be problems. We already have the legacy network.service and > > NetworkManager, adding a third choice is kind of egregious. > > > The third choice is already in the images along with systemd. But it is not used as the default networking configuration stack by any existing Fedora deliverable of which I'm aware. > We are > talking about enabling it as default networking stack. Ubuntu already > has a beta implementation in place with network instead of networking > scripts. > > If we have to stay ahead in innovation, we have to do things for the > "First" of our four foundation. We were ahead in adopting systemd, we > should do the same for Networkd. The situation is not at all the same; there is no clear expectation that networkd will replace NetworkManager, indeed AFAIK it's been explicitly stated that it won't, because it's not desirable for it to cover all the complex configurations NM supports. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net _______________________________________________ cloud mailing list cloud@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/cloud@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
