On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 3:38 AM, Paul Gideon Dann <pdgiddie@xxxxxxxxx> 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!
