[aur-general] Are AUR VCS packages that depend on AUR VCS packages from other projects a good idea and who should decide on that ?
scimmia at archlinux.org
Tue May 7 18:02:58 UTC 2019
On Tue, 7 May 2019 13:42:05 -0400
Eli Schwartz via aur-general <aur-general at archlinux.org> wrote:
> On 5/3/19 11:41 AM, Doug Newgard via aur-general wrote:
> > On Fri, 3 May 2019 11:32:57 -0400
> > Eli Schwartz via aur-general <aur-general at archlinux.org> wrote:
> >> Apparently, he *really* thinks that that is a bad idea and an inferior
> >> mesa-git experience.
> > And apparently the mesa developers disagree. Remember how this thread started.
> This logic is automatically invalid, no ifs ands or buts.
Your argument is that is makes for an unacceptable mesa experience. The
experience intended by upstream is EXTREMELY valid.
> Upstream developers *by definition* have different priorities from
> downstream users. Furthermore, the world is full of projects run by
> upstreams who have unrealistic and sometimes ridiculous expectations;
> anyone who has packaged a lot of software should know this.
> If the mesa developers disagree, that's fine. But it doesn't actually
> mean anything. What would mean something is their rationale for
> disagreeing. Just like any other upstream software.
So how upstream intends their software to work doesn't mean anything? Try again.
More information about the aur-general