> Someone already talked about putting it back in the forums. They were > turned down because of those points («no reason for 2 methods», etc.). > This among other things (which are evident in any discussion in Arch > about OpenRC) signals a bad community. When it comes to Linux there are often many ways to accomplish the same goal. On the Arch wiki we try, wherever possible, to only mention the "right way" of doing things. Solutions that fix a particular problem while making other things worse are removed. The difficulty with OpenRC is that it is very hard to replace systemd without a) replacing a lot of packages, b) significantly complicating system maintenance and, c) straight up breaking your system; so when it comes to choosing the "right way" to replace systemd with OpenRC, the answer isn't clear. Alad made the call that apg's approach was "better" than artoo's and so removed artoo's from the wiki article. I can understand how that might be frustrating for some users, but please try to see how this isn't some systemd conspiracy to stifle users choice and this isn't a sign of a bad community. It's simply a matter of providing a single clear set of instructions on the wiki for users who wish to switch to OpenRC. Is the systemd-free approach better? I don't know, but Alad seems to think that it was causing a significant number of problems for many users on the forums. Can we stop you from using alternative means of switching to OpenRC? Nope! If you want to make OpenRC easier to use on Arch, here's how: 1. Get more involved in the AUR to develop more/better OpenRC-specific packages 2. Draft a new OpenRC wiki article on your User page 3. Work on 1 and 2 until you feel like you have a clearly superior method 4. Open a discussion on the OpenRC talk page about replacing the article (this will most likely involved discussion on your User page as well on how to improve your draft) 5. Success Max
