On 06/02/2019 20.32, Michal Kubecek wrote:
On Wed, Feb 06, 2019 at 05:48:24PM +0100, Liam Proven wrote:
On 2/6/19 5:05 PM, Jeff Mahoney wrote:
It's a simple cost-benefit analysis. Developer time (even if it's volunteer) isn't free. If you want to invest your personal time in auditing and improving every file system that Linux supports, that's certainly your prerogative. As those file systems are improved, we can discuss removing them from the blacklist.
But that's not how it works.
I'm afraid that how it works is:
"I tried $DISTRO-1 but it didn't work with $DISTRO-2 and $OTHER-OS, so I switched to $DISTRO-3 because it just worked."
And that least to
"Yeah, $DISTRO-1 doesn't work as well with other hardware and doesn't dual-boot well, so don't waste your time on it."
I'm not saying this is right or good. It's just how it is.
Which inevitably brings us back to the question if our primary goal is (or should be) having as many users as possible, whatever it takes. As I already explained, my answer is negative because the type of thinking you just described is typical for users who would consume quite a lot of resources with little chance to ever give something back (except for having many users which is of questionable value).
I believe (hope?) that those that try and keep using a distro for some time (a year?) likely keep using it when they have some problem, because they have learnt during that time. Easier to try solve the problem than jumping again and start learning again. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 15.0 x86_64 at Telcontar)