Yeah, i agree, software wear and tear is a bitch. After 15 years of continued use, i reckon most of the 0s are cracked open, and the 1s are likely entirely dull.

How is that a point? Yes, it's a design decision, obviously it's one. So what? Weren't you trying to point out why in your opinion database-stored configuration is superior over text files -- i.e. why you think the design decision should be done in favor of binary files?
BTW in the unix-like world, the UNIX philosophy gives a pretty definite rationale behind the design decision made in this context.
Please, take the time and read this

You're doing it wrong.

I tried, but all i got in return were straw-men. Not even well-thought-out straw-men.
I'm polite enough, i even said "please".

If you feel like discussing the matter at hand, start by considering the points you've ignored until now in this conversation.

NetHack, preferrably on a public server
Years of time can be wasted

Look, there are over 9000 memes, but your list doesn't contain any.

Your arguments still don't make sense at all, therefore this will be me last reply.
At first, you claimed a replicated database was more reliable than a non-replicated hard disk. Note how your argument is replication vs no replication, not files vs database files.
Now you're arguing that manual configuration editing is inferior to a configuration server, again it's not about text files vs database files, but manual vs automatic.

Please try to become a little more competent.

Are you trying to disprove your own point now?

Your reply addresses zero of my arguments. Try again.

cool dupe bro

What kind of retarded straw-man or obvious troll is that? Where do you think databases store their data? In the magic data cloud? Besides, what does the 'non-standard' part even *mean*?

If the hard drive crashes, data may be lost. If the data is stored redundantly, data may be safe. News at 11. Seriously, where to you *think* databases store their data?
On a side point, /if/ your hard drive crashes, the odds of recovering text files from the mess are way better than recovering database data files, as they are /way/ larger and more complicated.

Really, it's beyond embarrassment. Git by its very nature *deals with* text files.

Of course you are.

I really don't care. I abandoned Linux in favour of the BSDs when it started to smell, and you're the perfect example of why it does that nowadays

Something tells me you're also a systemd proponent.
It's about simplicity, and therefore flexibility. If /etc becomes a database, you lose the ability to use your standard tools on it, which, gasp, tend to work on text files, because it's the one single truly universal /and/ human-digestable format.

your post made me realize that "ruinit" would be an awesome name for a new init system

Wow, I just puked a bit.

sed -n '/^[^#]/p' ldap.conf

...which is precisely what happens with Microsoft's retarded patch-whateverday approach to make the amount of fixes appear smaller.