systemd and changes
Matthew Miller
mattdm at mattdm.org
Wed Aug 25 04:02:41 UTC 2010
On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 07:06:06PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> I don't think this is an important change, in the sense that I've noted
> others as important. But, like changing "isolate" to "switch-to", it
> improves the user experience. With terms like "isolate" and "maintenance",
> systemd comes with quirky new terminology to learn. With "broken" when a
> service is broken, it's self-explanatory. "Needs maintenance" would also
> work, but it's too long.
I *knew* I remembered something about SMF from your "rethinking pid 1" blog
post. There, you say:
However, in many ways it is overly complex and, let's say, a bit academic
with its excessive use of XML and new terminology for known things. It is
also closely bound to Solaris specific features such as the contract
system.
Yeahhh. So, that's what I'm sayin': let's avoid bringing in its "academic"
complexity and terminology, in cases where we can just be straightforward.
:)
--
Matthew Miller <mattdm at mattdm.org>
Senior Systems Architect -- Instructional & Research Computing Services
Harvard School of Engineering & Applied Sciences
More information about the devel
mailing list