Artix Linux Forum

Thus why not to enable them just once by default? .

archlinux was never focused on lazy peoples, archlinux  was and is for advanced users, who knows at least the basics, they don't changed this trend since foundation in 2002.
This should be kept in mind by anyone who wants to use Archlinux / Artixlinux.
i want not have from artixlinux a manjaro without systemd, truth to say

Me too. I've never used Manjaro and don't want to. I think it's weird and wrongly positioned distro. For those who completely new to Linux I advise Ubuntu or Mint. For those who are experienced vanilla Arch and its other derivatives are better choice. I'd rather like to have from Artix somewhat "Arco without systemd"
Yes, OS will be working, but what else? We don't work with OS, we work with applications. Even some openbox- and tint2-related ricing stuff (like volumeicon and xxkb) is present only in community repo.

What I mean by "just werks", it stands for I install base system, then install desired packages, then copy my backed up and well-tinkered config, and then work. No systemd-related bullshit like trying to turn on an unexistent keyboard backlight during startup, no freezes and CPU overheating caused by kernel (as it used to be in Void), sound works OOTB, both pulseaudio and pipewire (in Devuan, they still build PA against systemd, which causes some minor but annoying bugs; in Debian and Devuan testing, PW was frozen at unfortunate version and it doesn't work well and won't do this in several years to come), nvidia-optimus works fine just after installing (that's not true in Void, where proprietary nvidia driver is poorly built), aa-notify, aa-logprof and other apparmor utilities properly understand auditd logs OOTB (in the forthcoming Debian 11, old perl versions of these utilities are used, and they understand only kern.log generated by rsyslogd). In Artix, I can choose openoffice-still and enjoy a stable version of this (my work involves using the office suite, and I don't want to mess up with annoying bugs in fresh versions; that's why I decided not to use Void as my daily driver, 'cause they ship only fresh version).

So... That's why I think Artix is a great distro and you guys are doing a great job in maintaining it. But let's distinguish necessary tinkering work in order to adjust a particular installation to a particular hardware or personal tastes from tedious and unnecessary, I would say, "semi-bureaucratic" work. For me, I'm happy with 'community' and 'extra' repos enabled, because I use programs from there in my everyday work. And I'm happy with the fact that they were enabled by default. Had they not be enabled, I'd was to enable them manually during installation. And I suppose most of the Artix users on most of the installations would do so. Thus why not to enable them just once by default? I suppose that's what is called "reasonable defaults".

Why do you think Manjaro is a weird and wrongly positioned distro? In my experience all distros stand or fall on their own merits or or their lack of merits. Manjaro seems to be doing well and has a lot of users and members. They are merely operating on a different set of directives to what others are. That's all.

In the 20 years I have been using Linux, I have used many different distros....have seen some come and go. That is the diversity that makes Linux such a great concept, in my opinion.
The more the merrier I say.

Best regards.

Ofc, I don't want to blame neither Manjaro itself, nor the people who use it and admire it. But I've read plenty of complaints that it breaks etc, and I understand why it is.

Manjaro is positioned as somewhat "user-friendly Arch" or something like Ubuntu, but based on Arth rather than Debian. But in my point of view it's impossible to make something like Ubuntu LTS or Linux Mint based or Arch - I mean, the OS which you install in 15 mins, add/remove software via beautiful GUI and work.

Of course, Arch and its derivatives, Artix included, is a great OS, and it's in fact quite stable, but it is the user who makes Arch unstable. In order to make Arch[-based] installation stable, one must understand its internal mechanics and rely heavily on CLI. Thus, for those who want something like rolling Ubuntu based on Arch, Manjaro is in most cases too unstable, and those, who understand Arch and know how to tinker it, would prefer other distributions: vanilla Arch, Arco, Artix, even Void. I think that in fact vanilla Arch is more stable and reliable in experienced hands than Manjaro. Artix is much closer to vanilla Arch in this aspect compared to Manjaro, and I do like it.

In my experience Manjaro is not "too unstable".

because it is artix linux, not arch linux.
If users want a 3rd party repo, they can add it, but they are on their own with packages, ie no artix support for these.