Uoti Urpala <uoti.urp...@pp1.inet.fi> writes: > Marc Haber wrote: >> And it is still completely inferior even to dpkg-conffile handling, >> which has huge wishes left open as well.
> False. The message you replied to already listed advantages over > dpkg-conffile handling. This was also already discussed before: > https://lists.debian.org/<1336580040.28230.9.camel@glyph.nonexistent.invalid> We've had this discussion a lot. There is an ongoing technical disagreement of opinion about the tradeoffs. Pointing out that you've previously posted your side of the argument isn't any more likely to change anyone's mind than it did when you posted it the first time. The people who disagreed with your arguments the first time are still going to disagree with them now, and are going to be no more convinced than they were the first time. In fact, given the tone that you use in these discussions and the nature of human psychology, it's quite likely that the more you post on this topic, the *less* people are going to agree with you. If you want to see systemd adopted by default in Debian, the best thing that you could do to achieve that goal, given your communication style, is to stop sending mail about it to debian-devel. Every time you post another one of these sorts of messages, you further harden opposition to systemd. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87r4goz6a3....@windlord.stanford.edu
