[pacman-dev] [ Package Signing ] Your signature please

[Dan McGee]

I'm not sure I even want to get involved in this thread. :/

On Sat, Feb 19, 2011 at 5:05 PM, Allan McRae <allan at archlinux.org> wrote:
> On 20/02/11 08:42, Daniel Mendler wrote:
>>
>> @Allan: I am a bit disappointed with your opinion that you want to
>> implement only features that you care about. I think there is also a
>> reponsibility if you are one of the main developers of the package
>> manager of a popular distribution.
This is totally false. None of us signed up because we wanted to code
stuff other people wanted; we saw an open source project we could
contribute to and all the sudden we ended up being the lead
developers. If our fellow developers were telling us "hey we really
need package signing", we'd probably set aside our having fun to work
on it a bit more, but if you notice, none of them are doing that.

Responsibility? I take responsibility for myself and no one else,
anything else would be stupid and make me legally liable for work I
don't even get paid for.

>> And you don't even have to implement
>> the features yourself - there are people who are willing to help. But
>> those people should also get some support by you.
>
> Those people get full support from me.  You might have seen between these
> emails that I reviewed the three patches for package signing posted to this
> list yesterday within 12 hours of them being posted.
>
> I am serious when I say "patches welcome".  I just turns out those people
> that claim to be willing to help, rare do anything.
The other thing we frequently see is work that doesn't come close to
meeting our standards, and when we point this out, we get accused of
not wanting to implement package signing. At that point, what are we
expected to do? Redo the work ourself?

Either way, can we all just relax a bit? This thread is becoming a
bitching ground, and nothing productive has come out of it. Act civil
and stop using the guise of the internet to say anything you want and
attack others. It really isn't appropriate.

-Dan