From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8956E1381F3 for ; Sat, 25 May 2013 17:19:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9D6AFE0BC7; Sat, 25 May 2013 17:19:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 97092E0BC2 for ; Sat, 25 May 2013 17:19:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (178-37-163-206.adsl.inetia.pl [178.37.163.206]) (using SSLv3 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: mgorny) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A808F33DF13; Sat, 25 May 2013 17:19:44 +0000 (UTC) Date: Sat, 25 May 2013 18:48:30 +0200 From: =?ISO-8859-2?B?TWljaGGzIEfzcm55?= To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Cc: yngwin@gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Going against co-maintainer's wishes (ref. bug 412697) Message-ID: <20130525184830.5bb25483@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: References: Organization: Gentoo X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.9.0 (GTK+ 2.24.18; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=PGP-SHA512; boundary="Sig_/zuP1Ycm.Cx6Ci2qASoKAQ.W"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: 4506af77-56fd-40c9-8d60-7ff044776671 X-Archives-Hash: 899de2f6a475068be09be2b79d9bb0ac --Sig_/zuP1Ycm.Cx6Ci2qASoKAQ.W Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, 26 May 2013 00:14:36 +0800 Ben de Groot wrote: > I'm taking this from https://bugs.gentoo.org/412697 to the dev mailing > list, since this discussion doesn't really belong on bugzilla. Since Bugzilla is down at the moment and it seems not to be mentioned anywhere in the mail, the package is x11-misc/lightdm. > Some background copied from the bug report: >=20 > (In reply to comment #21) > > (In reply to comment #19) > > > WTF man? No, we do not _need_ to add support for an alternative init = system > > > that is so aggressively opposed to what we stand for. But since you p= ushed > > > this change through against my wishes, I will remove myself as mainta= iner of > > > this package. > > You seem to have ignored all the discussions in -dev where it was agree= d to > > install systemd files without even a useflag. >=20 > I haven't ignored the discussion. We agreed to install systemd files > IF they are shipped by upstream. Where? I don't even think I've seen a single statement like this on the late threads. > > So really, if you disagree > > this is your problem since the community agreed to do it. >=20 > Unless I am mistaken, we did NOT agree anywhere that Gentoo > maintainers MUST add systemd support when upstream does not ship such > files. We did agree that Gentoo maintainers are not supposed to work on enabling systemd support if they don't want to. On the other hand, we also agreed that they shouldn't refuse unit files if anyone else does the work for them. > > It is also NOT documented anywhere that Gentoo supports *ONLY* openrc. > > Just grep for "systemd_dounit" in the tree and see how many pakcages do= that. >=20 > So? That does not mean that as package maintainer I have to accept a > patch to support a non-default init system. Some maintainers may > choose to do so, others may choose not to. I'm afraid you're using the word 'patch' incorrectly here. If it was about a patch, I would agree with you. A patch -- something that actually modifies package sources or files currently installed by package. A patch that could mean that our package diverges from upstream or introduces new bugs for existing users. A unit file is *not* a patch. It's a file. A file that is incorporated into the package without modifying its existing contents or behavior on non-systemd systems. It's not something that could really cause problems for OpenRC users. > > It is very sad to be threatened over and over. If I do something then X > > people will be unhappy. If I do it Y people will be unhappy. So in this= case > > I did what we agreed to do in the mailing list. >=20 > We did not agree on this. Package maintainers may do as they wish for > their own packages. Package maintainers are to respect other developers, teams and users. While their wishes are important, Gentoo rules and policies are even more important. Much like quite a consistent experience for users. > The whole paragraph on that page says: "Gentoo is a free operating > system based on either Linux or FreeBSD that can be automatically > optimized and customized for just about any application or need. > Extreme configurability, performance and a top-notch user and > developer community are all hallmarks of the Gentoo experience. " >=20 > Systemd is diametrically opposed to the FreeBSD, customization, > extreme configurability, and top-notch developer community aspects of > that. Systemd upstream developers have made it abundantly clear they > are not interested in working with Gentoo developers to see to the > needs of source-based distros. They stand for vertical integration > instead of customization and configurability. >=20 > And you misunderstood: it is systemd that is aggressively opposed to > Gentoo. But apparently that doesn't bother some of our developers and > Gentoo is becoming more and more welcoming to it. Protecting freedom through taking away the freedom of using systemd? Makes sense really. > > > But since you pushed this change through against my wishes, I will re= move myself as maintainer of this package. > > > > If having systemd@g.o (or any other alternative init system, or any oth= er > > developer permitted by them or a higher instance) add just a few charac= ters > > you never need to touch and changing an unit file you don't want is too > > much, then you're just stepping away from the collaborative effort that > > pursues the goal as stated on the about page of Gentoo; we're all in th= is > > together, don't make hate tear you apart. >=20 > I am making a stand for what I believe in. That is not hate. I simply > think that systemd is a bad idea. But if others want to make it work > on Gentoo, that is their time to waste. Gentoo is not about making stands or running vendettas. 'Sorry, you have to use Ubuntu because we support the freedom of letting our developers make stands against X'. And yet *the others* have actually wasted their time to make it work. And now you're angry at them for it. And actually wasting people's time by reviving the same topic. Though you should expect that at this point most of the developers will simply ignore the topic. > > Are you going to stop maintaining > > any package alternative init system maintainers and users come nag you = on? :( >=20 > That is not what this is about. I will simply do the same as I already > did on this bug: refer users to upstream. >=20 > But if a co-maintainer pushes through a change that I oppose, then > working together becomes quite difficult. In this case I opted to give > up maintainership. Yet another stand. No offense but I'm afraid it's quite childish of you. I don't understand why you're so proud of it. It's a bit like 'Gentoo will play as I like. If it doesn't, then I will play against Gentoo. And if that doesn't help, I will resent and slam the door, and then write to ml about it.' --=20 Best regards, Micha=B3 G=F3rny --Sig_/zuP1Ycm.Cx6Ci2qASoKAQ.W Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.20 (GNU/Linux) iQJ8BAEBCgBmBQJRoOthXxSAAAAAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25zLm9w ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXQ1RUJGMjBGOTk2RkIzQzIyQ0M2RkNBNDBC QUJGMUQ1RkY4QzgxMTBBAAoJELq/HV/4yBEK7eYP/3DPovalSHCx41U9MdjKlFCI Lg866rTr1tuD4HHinaVqGNhNV1EeEv5MotFBK/+xKszoNROVWvRclKW+igyx6eXG WHh8xaeIX7nFazFqRkQ4usFRRlYQYVLv5sywmhzBd4v7t6xcQ5lJrCMwUUfS8iBj a+E+ur7EvZO7u+ihp1Z2oP+OQ2KTmM/A0j4BfcKzRIOy8DnpVcc9ij1JPNuaijU4 E7tBfT7IJU3TonC440rSJX9Q0GnAsHF8qozN4ukMxFeOSEaY6E9uZgWip32Jw3Dv iWruUU7/QloZ40XNNdIpdK4O7uDXdEX2kE5fVURNE7paq8BRNZ1sucRTvxkDEJbl zpfIyDUK0X9wlk1k0svzYwYT11+bu3Ql3daAAgcdlFRO9MxtoOqEK5DWb3nv6kU1 AkFq8s2uUN0j82QbO+/Js0SFhKOG0s4S13Gpq+jAQycFmruzfRpTx/MxsgOJ3HJg 6CPc34zeAJSXq26qQJeBWJfPYog15iumlADSkg2RnrxAl7JVZgz0Zw7CBE+kT3vc a3BQFXuE2nIzNccEsTeETLdWd8Mh0BLpYHooTLq3s6/e65P2ClYqGMdCNPYb7zDa eYqdfmG0jNjJBhMRB9R89XsUpfI3kdvjGnGxm0j9m/+anP5PI+y8DyzkPKJbnj06 pz9nFFH2NNNj3HsfFI/V =I2L9 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/zuP1Ycm.Cx6Ci2qASoKAQ.W--