> From: "Dan Williams" <[email protected]> > Well, at least we want to make that an *option*. Pragmatically, this > is > Linux, and I don't think we'll ever achieve 100% coverage, and I > don't > think we *want* to either (if we did, NM would be a pile of > unmaintainable hacks).
Yep. An option for anyone and *the* option for Fedora and those who already decided. > Instead, I believe our goal is to make NM useful enough, easy enough, > and understandable enough, that people *want* to use NM rather than > wading through a bunch of scripts. We don't want to force NM upon > people; instead we need to make NM *better* than the existing options > so > that it's a no-brainer choice. There will always be people that want > to > tinker and do something else or have so totally crack-rock use-cases > that we have no hope of easily supporting them, and that's fine. > That's > what software is about. I agreed even before you wrote it. Pavel _______________________________________________ networkmanager-list mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/networkmanager-list
