[aur-general] Someone hug sergej

w9ya w9ya at qrparci.net
Wed Dec 3 01:31:46 EST 2008

Okay Greg a few easy questions I am happy to answer for you;

- Um, the freedom of the AUR is because of the freedom in the entire TU
system (aur is a part of it). If you remove some freedom from one, then you
risk the same freedom in the other. That *IS* human nature and the way
things tend to work. So I wil ask you to please explain how making the
community repo "more official" will help you ? Please be specific as I am
just not following you at the moment. I do not see what is broken.

- I am not unhappy with ANYONE's commitment or how much they are getting
done. But I do take seriously some of the outbursts about who is doing what
AND making the TUs more responsive to the aurvotes and so forth. NO ONE
should have to listen to such things when it is so simple to become a TU and
spend time on a packaging solution. I hope you understand that I do not
expect you or anyone to do ANYTHING but use archlinux and interact when you
have a problem of some sort. So, yeah I am fine with you. And you have not
called me names and even more ugly things.

IN FACT, if someone like you wrote me privately and asked me to consider
helping them with THEIR PKGBUILD I have been known to do so. Arch_assistant
is one such PKGBUILD I have helped people with. Having a lot of TUs around
can be very helpful for this kind of thing. Will making the TU system more
"official" (and I *assume* you mean more like the discussions and so forth
the devs do concerning what goes into their repos) help or hurt those
seeking help with their PKGBUILDS and seeking attention in getting their
PKGBUILDs into the repo ? Will more or less people become Tus. Has anyone
proposing these changes even bothered to ask these questions publicly ? And
yes the likely answers DO matter. Even for the things you are concerned

I decided to pick up the google-earth one because it had become a problem. I
had some issues getting it to install and work here. So I took it over,
politely btw when those who's work it was were NOT willing (or able ?) to
continue with it on their own. (In any event I asked and through the course
of my asking it was turned over to me.) THE POINT ? Lately I have been
spending my time fighting this proposal. And having to spend time away from
PKGBUILDs and attending to new matters like asking permission to add things
to the repo will mean less of my time for the real work.

- Yes users are ALWAYS VERY IMPORTANT, including the ones that do NOT vote.
The problem is that a user has to understand enough about archlinux to get
ahold of aurvotes and yaourt and manage to install them, and we forget how
hard this process can be compared to simply installing it and using the
binary repos. The ham radio community seeks solutions to problems adn quite
frankly arch is a good solution, but asking them to vote and so forth is NOT
a good solution to seeing their use represented as it is quite a bit of
additional work to just vote on something. Heck most of the users of arch
are not even registered users, let alone voters.

-  I have been a steady user of arch linux since it's inception. If Judd V.
has stopped using it, I am now the longest continuous user of it I know of.
I have never stopped. As I mentioned earlier, TUs are not restricted to
perform ANY output and are allowed to "go on hiatus". I had some medical
issues that prevented me from a more active participation during the time
period you mention. I am happy to be alive and able to walk now as well as
contribute as I can..

- As far as the developers having a say in this. Heck they can say the deal
is off and it is time to kill the TU experiment. I am actually o.k. with
that, as it would be intellectually honest. Instead we are asking for the
dope on what is wrong and in the past two days have found out it was NOT the
immediate need of a resources problem we were told it was. In fact we found
out essentially the opposite. No problems there. We are also being told
about future fixes in store with NO indication of what they might be and
what they are. I am concerned because I understand human nature. I make my
living predicting short and long term effects of policy decisions. And I
make a **good** living at it. And this failure to disclose what the devs are
contemplating and telling us will be in our future is sad. More especially
since the TU system is NOT theirs to do so with. If it was the rest of the
distro, I would not complain about these last few weeks because it would not
be my place to complain about their repo.

I hope you understand better now. And I will let you in on a small secret.
Since it appears that (some of) the devs are asking the TUs to make this
decision, and without any demonstrated problem or any demonstrated
statistics to back up this so-called need; I will not likely spend any more
time worrying about what happens. I should probably stay and fight this
silliness, but in the end if the devs really want this unique TU experiment
to become their toy, I will gladly let them have it. I will simply quit
worrying about something that they will destroy it the process of "making it
more official".

And yes, the prime movers in this proposal ARE the devs. You allude to that,
and you are right.


Bob Finch

On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 10:35 PM, Grigorios Bouzakis <grbzks at gmail.com>wrote:

> On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 6:59 AM, w9ya <w9ya at qrparci.net> wrote:
> > Greg;
> >
> > I assume you are not aware that anyone can apply and become a TU. Because
> of
> > that, if anyone thinks something needs to be done that remains undone,
> then
> > the answer is to simply ask to become a TU. Within a short time, if you
> are
> > ready with some few examples of your work, you will become one. We have
> only
> > turned down one applicant and that was for lying to us.
> >
> Hi bfinch,
> Let me get some things straight.
> If you dont remember, since i had told you about it the last time we
> chated on the MLs
> I havent used [community] in more than a year. I only use 3 packages
> from unsupported,
> and theyre all maintained by me. In case anyone was wondering why i
> biitch there arent
> more of those popular packages in community, well i couldnt care less.
> Its the common good im interesting in not my own.
> If not all [extra] and mainly xorg doesnt to [community]  thats not
> gonna change easy.
> I dont believe in the TU system. IMO Its broken by design. Maybe it
> worked in the past.
> The reason to that is mosly that its not Official.
> I surely admit that AUR is one of Archlinux's strongest points but the
> scricts are generally
> of low quality and MAINLY in the binary reposisitory.
> I am not really insterested in that part of Archlinux. Its only the
> core that matters to me.
> Thats what im building my workstation on. If i find out anything wrong
> with ay aspect i try
> to fix it.
> I have said so in he past that if the way the community repository
> works doesnt change
> then Archlinux needs to be more souce based. I dont need a repository
> like that and IMO
> neither does Archlinux.
> Being a TU is not the only way to help Archlinux, and i try to help
> out as much as i can in
> other ways. Im not saying i am not making mistakes.
> > MORE TO THE POINT; When the aurvotes was added, we all knew that it could
> > not represent even one user correctly. Heck I have programs that dozens
> of
> > folks use that show NO VOTES, and they are using them by downloading them
> > from the community repo directly. At the time the aurvotes were added we
> > were promised that it would **NEVER  be mentioned that a TU was remiss by
> > not adding a aur entry that had some votes. Somehow over the course of a
> > couple of years we are now using a system of statistics that is decidedly
> in
> > error, with over two magnitudes of extremes and no way to determine the
> > shape of the curve (and the means). i.e. We have NO idea of even what
> > votes means.
> >
> > It boggles the mind.
> >
> >
> > Very best regards;
> >
> > Bob Finch
> Can i ask you something else? I expect to get an answer this time though.
> I am aware of a fact probably other people and probably some TUs arent
> aware of either.
> I dont know when exactly you became a TU, or how things worked back then.
> Your experience is welcome but werent you away from Archlinux for a
> couple of years?
> 2006-2008 from what i can estimate.
> How can you so conviniently talk about how are things are done? I
> think that for some
> reason you assume that in the 2 years you were away nothing changed.
> Which i guess
> i wrong. And you have proven that with abusing the repository.
> Sure freedom is great. So are you long philosophical emails.
> But youre playing in someone elses playground with their toys.
> Thats exactly where it shows the development module is TOTALLY broken.
> You, and IMO Sergej, at the very least are abusing the power you were
> given.
> But if phrakture who is in charge of the distro ATM tells you
> something you tell him to STFU
> cause we are TUs not developers and we are free to do whatever we want
> on our special
> place and he has no right to interfere.
> Well since you abused the hospitality you dont deserve such priviledges
> IMO.
> I will say it one last time. Either official [community] repository
> with some kind of moderation OFC,
> or not at all.
> And i dont really care how things were done when Archlinux had 10
> times less users than it does
> now in 2003.  Only how they should be done now. And the developers
> should have a saying in this.
> That would sum up my thoughts.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/attachments/20081202/2773e043/attachment.htm>

More information about the aur-general mailing list