Announcing ConnMan.net [LWN.net]

Announcing ConnMan.net

Posted Jun 24, 2009 6:44 UTC (Wed) by dlang (guest, #313)
In reply to: Announcing ConnMan.net by njs
Parent article: Announcing ConnMan.net

remember that this was in response to the initial 'Network Manager exists and does everything you would need, why would anyone bother to duplicate this work' post.

it's one more comment to show that Network Manager doesn't work for everyone, so there definantly is room for alternate implementations of the same basic idea

to post comments

Announcing ConnMan.net

Posted Jun 24, 2009 9:27 UTC (Wed) by njs (subscriber, #40338) [Link] (1 responses)

> it's one more comment to show that Network Manager doesn't work for everyone, so there definantly is room for alternate implementations of the same basic idea

But the conclusion doesn't follow. Unpacking, the argument seems to be: "Even after huge amounts of testing and debugging by all major distros, NetworkManager is not 100% bug-free in all configurations. Therefore, we should throw out all the code and experience that went into making it what the original poster calls 'fairly acceptable', and start over from scratch."

Don't get me wrong, I'm perfectly happy for people to play around with different approaches to solving this problem, there are good arguments for doing so, I'm glad wicd works for people, whatever. And I probably should have followed my first impulse and ignored that post as a bit of regrettable but inevitable noise. But I keep seeing these posts that are basically just HEY GUYS GUESS WHAT THIS SOFTWARE HAS BUGS without anything to tickle the reader's intellect, and what's the point?

(Not that this post has a leg to stand on there!)

Announcing ConnMan.net

Posted Jun 25, 2009 11:21 UTC (Thu) by marcH (subscriber, #57642) [Link]

> Unpacking, the argument seems to be: "Even after huge amounts of testing and debugging by all major distros, NetworkManager is not 100% bug-free in all configurations. Therefore, we should throw out all the code and experience that went into making it what the original poster calls 'fairly acceptable', and start over from scratch."

I unpacked something slightly different, making much more sense. But of course perception is subjective.

"After huge amounts of testing and code review, NetworkManager has too many bugs and design limitations and these are too hard to fix. So let us start from scratch, after of course learning from its mistakes".

I am not saying this is true, but it does make sense.