Re: [aur-general] Remove ardour3-svn
Le 21 déc. 2010 18:33, "Xyne" <xyne@archlinux.ca> a écrit :
On 2010-12-21 15:55 +0100 (51:2) Cédric Girard wrote:
I know why you did it, even though I don't see why AUR PKGBUILDs content should be dictated by upstream devs.
It's not being dictated by upstream devs. The dev has expressed concerns
we're trying to address them out of respect. He has been neither rude nor demanding from what I have seen, and a simple message is a completely reasonable solution.
Really, the entire OSS community would fall apart if everyone adopted this apparent attitude of "I don't have to do shit for you, no matter how ridiculously easy it would be for me, so why should I? Now do more for me." It's parasitic consumption and it undermines the mutualism on which we
and thrive. It seems there is a misunderstanding of what I was trying to express. It does not bother me that an upstream dev asks the maintainer to add some warnings about the early state of an application and the need of proper bug reports. And I'm fine with giving warnings about that. What I do not understand is him asking for the removal of a package. If he put a public svn he should accept that code is checked out from it. Anyway I do agree with the benefit of understanding and collaboration between open source communities.
Cédric Girard wrote:
It seems there is a misunderstanding of what I was trying to express.
It does not bother me that an upstream dev asks the maintainer to add some warnings about the early state of an application and the need of proper bug reports. And I'm fine with giving warnings about that.
What I do not understand is him asking for the removal of a package. If he put a public svn he should accept that code is checked out from it.
I partially agree, but in this case he's made the svn public so that users can contribute to development. Sure, anyone can use it, but it isn't there for that. The inclusion of the package on the AUR may be taken as an implication that the package is for general use, so I understand why the developer would request its removal. Note that he didn't show up and start demanding that it be removed (at least not from what I've seen). He simply expressed his concerns and gave his reasons, and we in turn addressed them.
participants (2)
-
Cédric Girard
-
Xyne