[arch-dev-public] rc.d files, unmaintained packages - and, the quality of our repositories

Gaetan Bisson bisson at archlinux.org
Wed Jul 17 19:51:55 EDT 2013

[2013-07-17 12:06:24 -0700] Connor Behan:
> As for the whole "push first discuss later" thing, people shouldn't be
> afraid to take this approach. Maybe I misused it but "back in my day"
> there was an Arch dev who had wise words
> <https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?pid=355343#p355343> about this
> sort of thing.

There is quite a big difference between writing code and pushing
deprecated code to our repositories; I really hope you can see that.
Obviously you are free to improve netcfg's code; but pushing it to our
repos is a different story.

Could we agree that going against the concerted decisions of official
packagers (as made on this list) is obviously wrong, and that you will
not do it again in the future? It'd be nice if we could all move on...

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 230 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-dev-public/attachments/20130718/631700ee/attachment.asc>

More information about the arch-dev-public mailing list