[arch-general] signoff kernel26-22.214.171.124-6
Arvid Ephraim Picciani
aep at ibcsolutions.de
Wed Mar 26 22:26:43 EDT 2008
On Wednesday 26 March 2008 23:10:58 Geoff wrote:
> It assumes that there has been a debate (or perhaps that no
> debate was possible in the first place), and has been lost
there was on irc. its where i felt pretty alone with my ideas. left freenode.
turns out that the medium irc is missing a majority of voices.
On Wednesday 26 March 2008 20:21:49 Dimitrios Apostolou wrote:
> If arch returns to "the arch way" please remind me to post a list of
> packages with superfluous patches applied...
I have a few very specific packages in mind too :)
I even though about picking a specific package up in case the specific
developer gets accidently hit by a car multiple times or lost in a snake pit
during the process.
On Wed 2008-03-26 16:46 , Jan de Groot wrote:
>I think we are overrating the problem here. I never saw in Arch's packages
>patches applied just for fun, or to add useless features
>I have no idea why mactel patches aren't merged
>in the vanilla tree, but I'd like to boot Arch on my macbook anyway.
>if someone wants a
>kernel26-zomgvanillaistehbest , he can remove all the patches and create the
> packages by himself.
I disagree, but it doesn't matter since no one forces us to use the same
I chose arch becouse its ideas match MINE. not yours.
On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 3:04 PM, Filip Wojciechowski <fwojciec at gmail.com>
> I, personally, find this divisive rhetoric of good (old) users vs. bad
> (new) users, as well as good developers (who do what "we" want them to
> do) vs. bad developers (who "should be kicked out") rather disturbing
well face it. there are two different tastes here. see above. It's not "new"
vs "old" but actually arch way vs not. Finally lines have to be drawn
clearly. It's unconvinient becouse it _might_ result in some people leaving
archlinux. but it doesnt have to. Althought actually i expect a couple of
users to leave: Those who cry in irc about not getting into a ready fucked up
kde or gnome right after clicking throught the gui installer.
On Wednesday 26 March 2008 16:46:18 Jan de Groot wrote:
> Get ready to run a
> distro that breaks your system on every pacman -Syu because upgrade paths
> are not handled. Yes, this is win win win I guess.
You are totally right.
Archlinux with the full force of the arch way, has a higher risk to fail on
system upgrade then debian. But: (Without going into detail how
debians "convenience "automaticly crippled my apache a few weeks ago):
I am willing to trade stability for transparency.
I am willing to trade safety for freedom.
quote me on that if you need to. This view hasnt changed since i am alive. I
can use my damn brain and i don't need other people to do that for me.
> If we want to go this way, I consider myself as ex-developer.
Thats sad. But i dont blame you devs (except one, who i blame personally for
beeing an asshole and for knowingly damaging specific projects including
It's just that arch isnt a 100 users distro anymore, so you see yourself
actually providing more tools for more users. etc. It's understandable that
you feel uncomfortable about rejecting a specific patch just becouse it
violates the arch way while it could help like 20 users get arch run by
default on their dishing machine.
And of course you have to admit that you like getting attention from users who
admire your work for them. Most of us who are now complaining propably never
did say thank you for fixing a stupid typo in some stupid Makefile, becouse
we can do that ourselfs.
But: i do say thank you for all those years of having a working distro that
actually didn't make me want to punch faces every keystroke i make.
I admire your work no less. In fact my admiration is of higher quality,
becouse i actually mean it, and i actually stand here (virtually. imagine me
in a ninja suite) and fight for it.
best regards/Mit freundlichen Grüßen
Arvid Ephraim Picciani
More information about the arch-general