I suppose, but again, I would hardly call it a cycle of breakages, after all, that was the one lone time anything major broke (blatant user error aside). In small cases where things do break (non-critical) it is sort of assumed that the people using arch will have a certain level of competence in diagnosing and fixing even minor issues. Though I will admit, that is partially less relevent now, with the introduction of archinstall, and distros such as EndeavourOS.
EndeavourOS, CachyOS, and archinstall do lower the barrier to entry for Arch itself, which means that there may be really fresh users (who should probably not be on Arch) using it. As wild as it sounds, those Arch and its distros get recommended to new users that aren’t technically inclined.
For the seasoned Arch users, non-critical breaks don’t feel as serious, since they can fix him. It’s just the new users wandering in a dark place without light (a place they shouldn’t be encouraged to wander, without knowledge), that these problems are serious or can be made worse by said user misunderstanding how to apply fixes. Or prevent issues in the future.
I agree that there are likely very few serious breakages not caused by a user happening on Arch, just the potential of them happening (anything made by human hands occasionally will suffer this).
I suppose, but again, I would hardly call it a cycle of breakages, after all, that was the one lone time anything major broke (blatant user error aside). In small cases where things do break (non-critical) it is sort of assumed that the people using arch will have a certain level of competence in diagnosing and fixing even minor issues. Though I will admit, that is partially less relevent now, with the introduction of archinstall, and distros such as EndeavourOS.
EndeavourOS, CachyOS, and archinstall do lower the barrier to entry for Arch itself, which means that there may be really fresh users (who should probably not be on Arch) using it. As wild as it sounds, those Arch and its distros get recommended to new users that aren’t technically inclined.
For the seasoned Arch users, non-critical breaks don’t feel as serious, since they can fix him. It’s just the new users wandering in a dark place without light (a place they shouldn’t be encouraged to wander, without knowledge), that these problems are serious or can be made worse by said user misunderstanding how to apply fixes. Or prevent issues in the future.
I agree that there are likely very few serious breakages not caused by a user happening on Arch, just the potential of them happening (anything made by human hands occasionally will suffer this).
Yeah, I agree.