[arch-general] Another rant on arch way abuse and false promises (was: xf86-input-evdev conflicts with xorg-server. Remove xorg-server?)

[Arvid Picciani]

Aaron Griffin wrote:

 > Which package has patches to add these features? Looking at
 > xorg-server, I only see one extraneous patch that simple replaces the
 > default grey stipple pattern with black. The rest seem (at a glance)
 > to fix real bugs

You have a point here, in that i have used a fuzzy description of the 
problem, in the assumption you and possible other readers remember the 
numerous rants on this ML. At very least I'd except You to remember your 
own blog. I'm going to post some hard facts to your convenience.

aep at andariel: ~ egrep 'enable|disable|patch -N' 
/var/abs/extra/xorg-server/PKGBUILD | wc -l
24

 > Jan has always done a good job in the past of keeping Xorg as
 > impartial as possible without breaking things, and I'm assuming he did
 > the same here.

i was about to state that i didnt target him at all. Then i ran this:

aep at andariel: ~ (for i in $(grep "Jan de Groot"  /var/abs/ -r | cut -d 
':' -f 1); do egrep "enable|disable|patch -N" $i; done) | wc -l
543

Now you're propably saying numbers of downstream decisions doesn't say 
anything. Very true, which is why i prefer arguing about "intent"

aep at andariel: ~ grep Maintainer /var/abs/core/dbus-core/PKGBUILD
# Maintainer: Jan de Groot <jgc at archlinux.org>

and "bias"

aep at andariel: ~ (for i in $(grep "Jan de Groot"  /var/abs/ -r | cut -d 
':' -f 1 | cut -d '/' -f 5); do  if (pacman -Si $i | grep gnome 
 >/dev/null); then echo $i; fi; done) | wc -l
149

> The point is, just because *I* prefer something 
 > one way doesn't mean it's a good decision at the distro level.

So there is the name of some guy, who approves the unix philosophy, on 
this distro, but that guy decides it's a good idea that people who 
prefer ubuntu make the vital decisions.

I claim, You are leading a project whichs developers mainly
disprove what You stand for, or claim to stand for.
Which is why, ...

>> You'd be perfectly suited to throw the first stone,
>> Aaron.
> I'm confused by this. It seems rather standoffish and I'm not sure
> what you're trying to say here. 

.. i have offered my support numerous times.
I can see how the daily nuisance of fixing upstream bugs can
blur the own goals.
Alternatively,  You lie about your goals.
The very reason, for me to again zombify this minor issue into an open 
attack, is that you have responded to it, agreeing to the user base you 
promised to support, but not taken action.

> we have maintainers we can generally trust about
> these decisions.

Your opinions on trust vary, depending on topic. Last time we had this,
You promised to kick out tpowa. You didn't. I don't track if the abuse 
is ongoing, since I maintain all these packages myself now.

-- 
Arvid
Asgaard Technologies