[arch-general] signoff kernel26-184.108.40.206-6
jimis at gmx.net
Wed Mar 26 15:21:49 EDT 2008
Just my humble opinion on some of the issues raised:
> 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)
PLEASE no more patches that just add functionality! I want VANILLA
packages and that's one reason I chose Arch. The users should complain
to the specific application's developers for missing functionality and
If arch returns to "the arch way" please remind me to post a list of
packages with superfluous patches applied...
> * 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)
> Another point of interest may be that many people used to find gnome
> coming "ugly" by default (I don't know if this still the case). So what?
> Selecting your own theme is just a few mouse clicks away. Arch should
> never come with a fscked up KDE or Gnome profile like Ubuntu and others
> do. In fact, packages should *always* come with the defaults shipped by
Again I like respecting the application's developers choices.
More information about the arch-general