On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 6:46 PM, Arvid Picciani <aep@exys.org> wrote:
Ray Kohler wrote:
2009/12/1 Ng Oon-Ee <ngoonee@gmail.com>:
When I started on here the mantra was "Arch is what you make it". Packagers strive to make packages which are as vanilla as possible (without breaking) and provide the utility expected of such packages. Of course, if you want a system without hal/dbus, there's ABS and AUR. I don't see why your dislike of particular implementations implies that every user of Arch should forgo those implementations.
I've been thinking about this particular part of the "Arch way". I think what causes the conflict in some of these cases is that "trusting upstream" - one of our major principles - only works when upstream is sane. Wacky things (like what freedesktop.org has been doing to Xorg for a while now) make me begin to think this assumption is violated in some important cases. When upstream ceases to really care about Arch-like systems and only support more Ubuntu-like systems, we have a problem with our "don't patch" philosophy.
This implies that you're not ok with what happened to X. So you support my position. What you did not realize, however, is that these things are not upstream defaults. They have been specifically enabled downstream by the arch maintainers.
Actually, I did notice that. I didn't intend my comments to apply directly to this particular case. I am, however, in support of the particular changes you want for this case, though not strongly enough to get excited about it.
It is likely that the upstream will, as a reaction to my suggestion to reset to upstream defaults, add these options as default. I then suggest to still keep the upstream defaults, and maintain a fixed version of the package on aur.
The "sanity" here is very biased, hence there is no non-biased correct solution, other then that suggested by the founder Judd.
What I personally am in support of, in the general case, is "suckless.org-style" minimalism, rather than following upstream's direction. So if upstream changes the default to enable the hal and dbus bits, I will then be in favor of Arch disabling them, and we'll be in disagreement then. (That said, if that actually does happen, I won't asking the Arch devs to implement my wishes, since they'd clearly be in violation of the Arch way.)