[arch-general] Another rant on arch way abuse and false promises

[Arvid Picciani]

Ray Kohler wrote:

> What I personally am in support of, in the general case, is
> "suckless.org-style" minimalism, rather than following upstream's
> direction. 
> So if upstream changes the default to enable the hal and
> dbus bits, I will then be in favor of Arch disabling them, and we'll
> be in disagreement then. (That said, if that actually does happen, I
> won't asking the Arch devs to implement my wishes, since they'd
> clearly be in violation of the Arch way.)

Indeed. As brought up by others, forcing minimalism is as much violation 
as forcing bloat.
However,  arch has been built around the idea that users are capable of 
customizing packages to non-upstream settings.
I urge you to do exactly that.

I have posted  and will continue to post various bugs to the tracker to 
restore upstream defaults in favor for minimalism. If these reverts get 
rejected in favor for bloat, the clear bias is a disregard of the very 
core ideas of arch, and I will eventually fork arch entirely, given 
enough support.

Either way, i'd welcome if you contribute, in order to get the user 
experience you (and others including me) desire. That is, either 
contribute packages to aur, to fix insane upstream defaults, or 
contribute to an eventual fork to restore upstream defaults.
Will you? :)

-- 
Arvid
Asgaard Technologies