• Kata1yst@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    Accurate, but not bad, yes. It turns out standardized base systems and ABIs are important to an ecosystem.

    Linux tried the disorganized free-for-all for two decades, and what we got was fragmented “Ubuntu admins”, “debian admins”, “redhat admins”, “suse admins”, and a whole shitload of duplicated effort in the packaging ecosystem, only for half the packages out there to be locked to Ubuntu or RHEL. So the corporate interests, and a fair number of the community efforts, centralized their problems and solutions into a small standardized suite in Mesa+Wayland+systemd+Pipewire+flatpak, etc

    The result is a ton more interoperability, a truly open ecosystem where switching your distro doesn’t mean hiring different people and using different software, and a lot more stability and maturity.

    And hey, if a user or distro wants to do their own thing, they can make and own their niche, same as before. Nothing lost.

    It’s been kind of wild to watch over the past 15 years or so, makes me very hopeful for the next 15.

    • theshatterstone54@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      I agree that standardisation is good, but sudo is already a standard. If anything, I think this might, once again, split things further by creating another competing standard. It’s like that XKCD. But to be honest, I’m not an admin or enterprise customer yet, so I don’t know if this might not be an improvement. On an individual level, I’d be okay with run0 becoming a standard if it’s good enough, as long as we get a sudoedit or “sudo -e” replacement too, as I only discovered it about 2 months ago, but I already use it a lot.