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

[Arvid Picciani]

Jan de Groot wrote:
>> 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"
> 
> So, just because I'm the maintainer of a package that is required for a
> lot of the packages I maintain makes me biased.


Please read from top to down. This grep was to prove "intent".
It is in fact, not required for alot of packages upstream, and 
especially there is no valid reason to put it in core.


> we do specifically enable
> config-dbus, but dbus is a dependency anyways:


indeed, i am wrong on this one.  hal is already upstream default.


>> 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
> 
> Ooh, so I'm the GNOME maintainer, what next?

please don't quote out of context.  this statement was to prove your 
bias towards gnome, which in combination with the above dbus-core point, 
shows why this is a problem.


> I never even installed Ubuntu on any system, how can I prefer it? Arch
> has thousands of packages that need to work together, sometimes you
> can't stick to your so called "unix philosophy".

Thank's for confirming once again that you do NOT wish to follow unix 
philosophy.
This was indeed, the entire point of this rant.


-- 
Arvid
Asgaard Technologies