Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: Re: crossdev and multilib interference

[hasufell <hasufell@gentoo.org>]

Joshua Kinard:
> On 06/16/2014 21:47, hasufell wrote:
>> Joshua Kinard:
>>>
>>> How big of a patch would this change require to the existing crossdev ebuild?
>>>
>>
>> Probably quite trivial, but since vapier said "bs" to that proposal
>> (translates to "bullshit" I guess) I'll not put any work into that.
>>
>> So there we go. If you are cool, you can just say "bs", vanish and leave
>> stable arch in a broken state.
>>
>> Not even QA cares. Great. I'll try to get it on the next council agenda
>> then.
> 
> So you just take your ball and go home then?  That's not how it works.
> 
> Create the patch, and file it as a bug.  Then, raise awareness on the ML.
> That's how development works.  If your patch is reasonable and doesn't break
> things, odds are likely it'll push the other members of toolchain to
> consider incorporating it.
> 
> Equally using the Council as a hammer all the time doesn't work in the
> long-term, either.  If you whip a patch up, however, then not only could you
> raise this at the next council meeting, but additionally state you've gone
> that extra mile and created a patch that addresses the problem.
> 
> That's taking the ball and putting it into the goal.
> 

No, that's not how opensource works. You don't work on things after
"upstream" said "not interested".

https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=504824