[arch-general] signoff kernel26-2.6.24.3-6

[Arvid Ephraim Picciani]

On Monday 24 March 2008 22:47:34 RedShift wrote:
> I wanted to steer clear of personal attacks but unfortunately, tpowa has
> been a large contributer to the "lets adapt to the community"-style. I'm
> sorry to say it, but that's how I experience it (because of his work on
> kernel26 and qt) - and it needs to be said! Arch used to be different. I
> wouldn't be very surprised if Judd raised eyebrows on what's been going
> on lately.

imho somone should slap some arch devs around with "the arch way". multiple 
times. until they get it. I wish judd would suddenly appear and cast some 
magic spells to vanish all nonbelievers.

> What Arch needs is to have strict guidelines on PKGBUILDs and kick out
> any developers that don't have the same idea. A proposition:
> * Patches are unacceptable unless in the case the software wouldn't work
> *at all* (Hint, qt PKGBUILD)

yeah. Qt.... good example of how arch lost its way. Current list of distros 
we "reject" bug reports from (well we tell the users to try an upstream 
version):  debian, gentoo, fedora, mandriva, archlinux.  you made it on the 
list, congratulations. 

> * Pre and post install/remove actions should be kept at a minimum.
> Assume the user is smart (quite the opposite of the current trend).
actually written down in the "arch way"

> * Stress the fact that users must read pacman's output and the news.
> Alot of problems on IRC are related to the fact that people are lazy and
> don't read pacman's output _at all_. That's their own damn fault
we used to kick those people out without any hesitation. 

> * No handholding (like, no automatic stopping of daemons upon pre
> remove, adding of groups, etc...)
actually written down in "the arch way". and even phrakture agreed on irc.

> * Bugs and other issues that come from upstream, _should be fixed
> upstream_. If people do have problems with a certain issue, they can abs
> and makepkg themselves. (See rule 1)
actually written down in "the arch way". 

> * No branding or "Arch defaults". It only makes the PKGBUILDs more
> complex, and ruins the idea of the software coming in its original form
> from the authors
actually written down in "the arch way".  

i believe archlinux is lost and i stopped fighting for it.  It's exhausting to 
fight against argumentation like "but other distros do the same". those 
people just didnt get the point and should be kicked out of arch directly. 
You argue that those people actually contribute too much to kick them out? 
Look. they just contribute things that we don't want. We don't want 
downstream patches. We don't want automatic scripts (except udev, it damn 
rocks, thanks for that). We don't want downstream split packages. You could 
safe hundrets of hours by just not doing that.

No, no. the real issue is: Arch is going mainstream, and there are more people 
who aprechiate that then there are offenders. For those of you who adore the 
arch way,  I suggest grabbing pacman and all the good stuff that arch had, 
and just go to slackware. We're currently evaluating slack for servers. I 
miss my good old pacman, but at least its not feeling like ubuntu. 

btw. concerning the ISOs: i never used them. they suck. pacman -r ftw
-- 
best regards/Mit freundlichen Grüßen
Arvid Ephraim Picciani