Complexity: philosophical considerations

[rubyFeedback]

I think one issue with distri is complexity. You wrote that debian became too complicated/chaotic in many ways (internally; note that systemd also added complexity for what the user then has to know about). FUSE is a good idea, but it can not be denied that things become more complex as a consequence. I have seen complexity rise in nixos, for example, and for some reason these things ALWAYS become more and more complicated. I understand every user who wants to remain what works, simply because they don't have to invest much time into a distribution (you also cited lack of time as one reason for that).

I understand that this is all your spare time, and you like to experiment - but at the same time I think the values of simplicity should be included, even if fancy technical solutions seem far superior to the simpler, more boring approach. But there is a user cost associated with any different system too. (Debian lost it past the systemd move though - simpler init systems are much easier to use IMO; that apt+dpkg are built on a dying programming language does not help either, though - but I agree with your assessment that debian is bit-rotting into irrelevance due to internal problems).

[the-maldridge]

@rubyFeedback I'm curious what specific complexity you're considering. I work on Void Linux which has a package manager that has an ever growing list of package manager hooks, shell script extensions, and an every more complex build system. While the large number of FUSE mounts make distri complex in some ways, I think it offloads complexity to build time, which should make it simpler on the consuming end.

[max19931]

The problem with most complexity is the constant addition of more source code(added by code edits or just whole libraries) most with little to no benefit.

A large scale cleanup of any package Manager will speed it up. Distri is just trying to keep the dependency static and uses symlinks to wire up dependencies.