> > (2) AVAHI_DAEMON_START=0 should be default, IMHO. > This is your opinion, some people doesn't agree, that's why it's > possible to disable it.
Yes, reasonable minds can differ. That's not the issue. The issue is what should be the default. One could just as easily argue, as I do, that avahi should be disabled by default, and if you want it, you can install it. > Why do you want to "remove" it, disabling it is not enough? Excellent question, and raises the issue of why I hate it so much. The thing keeps coming back from the dead, especially at upgrade time. > It's a community effort, you can now add this information to the documentation. I don't think you are understanding my point about documentation. The thing that is really broken is the process. Yes, this particular information can be added to the docs for this particular piece of software, but that won't fix the process. If we don't nip this trend in the bud, we'll end up with substantially undocumented system that only a few "experts" contribute to. There are many specific reasons that Ubuntu is based on Debian, but all of the specifics are the result of a general process that produces a high quality product. The process is codified in the Debian Policy Manual. That process requires documentation so that everyone can participate and improve the product. It's not a difficult step to add a man page; it's just a step that needs doing _for_every_package_. > It's perfectly intelligible to someone who knows zeroconf, avahi is > just an implementation of of it. Well . . . that's my point: You have to already know zeroconf to understand the documentation. But that's silly, of course, because if you already know how it works, you don't need the documentation in the first place. > Before this sentence that you can read: > " The Avahi mDNS/DNS-SD daemon implementing Apple's ZeroConf > architecture (also known as "Rendezvous" or "Bonjour")." > If the manpage is not clear enough, you could look for "zeroconf" in wikipedia > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeroconf (1) If your networking system is hosed up, you can't read wikipedia or google. (2) If you want to rely on wikipedia, you don't need authoritative documentation on the system at all. For that matter, you don't need to include the source code either because you could just search the web and read the latest development branch online. While we're at it, let's go all the way and get rid of the help menus, too. We all hate writing help documentation, and anyway all the cool people already know. Let's all just ship a bunch of undocumented binaries and play hide-the-ball and go-find-it-yourself. I'm a manufacturer trying to fix Bug Number One. To do that, I have to ship a product that's easy to learn for those who DON'T already know. Loye
-- ubuntu-server mailing list ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
