[arch-general] signoff kernel26-2.6.24.3-6

[Grigorios Bouzakis]

On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 08:07:04PM +0100, Arvid Ephraim Picciani wrote:
> 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
>

Well actually the Arch Way has change a lot recently. Wiki says it was
done in order to be "more formal and understandable" but i feel quite
the opposite.
http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php?title=The_Arch_Way&diff=32398&oldid=32300

Greg