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 B28C31381F3 for ; Sun, 30 Jun 2013 11:08:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2B96CE08D9; Sun, 30 Jun 2013 11:08:57 +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 865EBE087D for ; Sun, 30 Jun 2013 11:08:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.4] (f055244109.adsl.alicedsl.de [78.55.244.109]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: chithanh) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 60E1233BDD7 for ; Sun, 30 Jun 2013 11:08:55 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <51D011C1.2040606@gentoo.org> Date: Sun, 30 Jun 2013 13:08:49 +0200 From: =?UTF-8?B?Q2jDrS1UaGFuaCBDaHJpc3RvcGhlciBOZ3V54buFbg==?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:20.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/20.0 SeaMonkey/2.17 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Project discussion list X-BeenThere: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Reply-To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Re: Questions for Candidates (was: Questioning/Interviewing council nominees) References: <51BF597B.6060600@gentoo.org> <51CF1759.10903@gentoo.org> <51CF4529.7010307@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6a1pre Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Archives-Salt: faae9ac8-6e2f-442e-9a92-bcf4d24af844 X-Archives-Hash: b863f1a40c016a09ebedd0ebaf865928 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Rich Freeman schrieb: > Forked packages are potentially even worse. Do you want the version of > apache that contains backported bugfixes but vanilla config files, or > the one that has gentooified configs but no init-script? Maybe somebody > should make yet another fork that mixes and matches those. Then another > maintainer makes a fork with a logrotate script, but they only include > systemd units and not an initd script. I do agree that forked packages do decrease usability to some degree. But I think that is not a serious problem as long as their number remains manageable, and proper documentation exists. Should a situation like the one you describe arise for a non-negligible amount of packages, then I might reconsider this position. Note however that I consider the scenario that you describe somewhat unlikely, because I expect that any package fork will be done with the intention of swaying as many users as possible to the new package. Therefore, it will probably include most if not all functions of the original package. > Maintainers shouldn't have to do the work to support any configuration > they're not comfortable testing/etc, but if somebody else comes along to > do it for them, the solution is cooperation, not revert wars. Yes, cooperation is better. But the method how to achieve cooperation is convincing through arguments, not forcing changes against the wishes of the maintainer. Best regards, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.20 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with SeaMonkey - http://www.enigmail.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAlHQEcEACgkQ+gvH2voEPRAKsgCeNMMLVG6x1l5r5hz2ZxUsP2kv jYUAn3tV5oMvHvFpSVP0W3LTatvz64C7 =z3uz -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----