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

[Nathan Wayde]

On 02/12/09 07:38, Arvid Picciani wrote:
> 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? :)
>
Let me just leave this right here. 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-F-3E8pyjFo