On 5/3/19 11:41 AM, Doug Newgard via aur-general wrote:
On Fri, 3 May 2019 11:32:57 -0400 Eli Schwartz via aur-general <aur-general@archlinux.org> wrote:
Apparently, he *really* thinks that that is a bad idea and an inferior mesa-git experience.
And apparently the mesa developers disagree. Remember how this thread started.
This logic is automatically invalid, no ifs ands or buts. Upstream developers *by definition* have different priorities from downstream users. Furthermore, the world is full of projects run by upstreams who have unrealistic and sometimes ridiculous expectations; anyone who has packaged a lot of software should know this. If the mesa developers disagree, that's fine. But it doesn't actually mean anything. What would mean something is their rationale for disagreeing. Just like any other upstream software. So far all I've seen are vague, shadowy statements being thrown around, and a whole lot of judging going on based on these shadowy statements. That's not good enough for me to accept "but muh authority as upstream dev" as an instant-win argument which refutes all comers. -- Eli Schwartz Bug Wrangler and Trusted User