Is this proof that systemd is completely broken?

[Ian Chapman]

On 14/07/14 01:23, Tom Horsley wrote:
> On Sun, 13 Jul 2014 19:18:35 +0200
> Timothy Murphy wrote:
>
>> I'm afraid it does not reassure me at all when Dan Williams says
>> he will be "granting every wish you dream of".
>
> Yea, and my wish and dream is that NetworkManager goes away,
> and network simply gets better support for wi-fi, which should
> have been what happened to begin with :-).

Come on Tom, you know that's not how it works. First of all you have to 
declare the original code legacy and broken because it doesn't support 
feature Z. Then you have to write a 'complete' replacement which does 
support feature Z, but it doesn't support feature X and Y. That doesn't 
matter really, because not many people used feature X and Y anyway. 
Plus, they're on the roadmap to be implemented at some point somewhere 
in the future. Besides the legacy system is still around if you need X 
and Y. You just can't have X, Y and Z.

-- 
Ian Chapman.