Why oxidizer over the existing Debian alternatives system? It's designed for this exact use case and already works with many existing packages. The author's res

Why oxidizer over the existing Debian alternatives system? It's designed for this exact use case and already works with many existing packages. The author's response in the comments was a basically a non-answer which doesn't exactly inspire confidence. > Long-term, my concern would be that this may somewhat muddy the picture for which packages need substantive fixes. If it is extremely easy to just revert, what is the benefit to switching? ??? Is this not the ideal situation? It provides low friction both for moving to the new cool thing and moving back to the existing tools when you have software that hard depends on GNU coreutils. You want the changeover to be high risk because it's hard to undo? I guess that's one way to force yourself to commit but the real users on the ground won't be happy when going to the LTS is substantially more work. This would be 3 different symlink managers in Ubuntu all used for different sets of software. The alternatives system at least has the benefit of integrating tightly with apt.