[Nut-upsdev] Asking hard questions about the NUT architecture

[Eric S. Raymond]

Christopher X. Candreva <chris at westnet.com>:
> We have the applications to think about too. It's all well and good to say 
> they should be able to recover gracefully, but to those of us supporting 
> things we didn't write, having the system shut down cleanly just might save 
> me hours of work later.

I don't understand this objection, sorry.  What could NUT's UPS-controlled
shutdown possibly be doing for you that a shutdown on SIGPWR wouldn't?

> > 3.  Why should we care about 'smart' serial UPSes any more?
> 
> I have a perfectly good serial-only Best 1.8kva from 1996 that gives me 3 
> hours of runtime, with monitoring. I should throw it out just because it 
> doesn't have USB ?

I wasn't making any suggestions at all about throwing out old equipment.
I was raising a question about the NUT project -- does it really value 
supporting obsolescent marques back to the year zero enough to keep 
all that complicated configuration crud in place?

The problem with serial-only UPSes is that the complexity cost of
supporting them hits users with modern equipment.  I think it's 
timde to ask whether that's a cost worth paying.
-- 
		<a href="http://www.catb.org/~esr/">Eric S. Raymond</a>