--Apple-Mail=_0FFE13C0-FF13-44B6-BE79-7A90EBB659F4
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset=utf-8
On 14 Jan 2022, at 23:10, Peter Stuge <peter@stuge.se> wrote:
Mike Gilbert wrote:
The current (proxied) maintainer is somewhat difficult to work with
Why is Arfrever being treated so bad here? To me, it looks like
you're the one who is difficult to work with. :\
floppym is not obligated to work with somebody if he finds it
difficult.
Jakov Smolić wrote:
From what I've investigated, other major distributions don't apply
any similar patches which means that we are likely to stop carrying
most (or even all) of the current patches.
What kind of silly groupthink is this? I expect Gentoo to champion choice.
Adding in a huge heap of patches which exceed the tree limits, have
no justification within them, and nobody else needs is a good reason
to dump them.
If someone actually wants them, that's another matter.
Even if they are being kept, justification for them should be made
so that others know why we're doing it, why it's worth rebasing them,
why we're changing the default behaviour of SQLite, ...
(This is all worth doing anyway, but Gentoo, if we're going to do
tropes, also doesn't like to deviate from upstream without
justification.)
Please don't bring out this cliched "choice" trope just because
we're discussing something. Obviously if they're actually useful
in an application, we can talk about keeping them.
Mike Gilbert wrote:
There is an open QA bug [1] regarding the large set of undocumented
patches that are being applied in the stable ebuilds.
Arfrever is active in the bug you linked, has provided explanations
for the patches and prepared to restructure the patches so that they
can be gated by local USE flags, has made several different concrete suggestions for possible implementations and requested feedback, but
has received no reply in the bug and instead there's now this
backstabbing discussion on this list.
You've missed discussions on IRC and some of the bugs _have_
gone unanswered (in particular
https://bugs.gentoo.org/825278 <
https://bugs.gentoo.org/825278>
which started this all off).
Also, we were waiting several months for new SQLite which
blocked security bumps for e.g. seamonkey.
He has also received replies on the bug.
Really?
You've intervened in something where you don't know all the
circumstances, including the history of the contributor,
with an aggressive tone. Really?
sam
--Apple-Mail=_0FFE13C0-FF13-44B6-BE79-7A90EBB659F4
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/html;
charset=utf-8
<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><br class=""><div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><
div class="">On 14 Jan 2022, at 23:10, Peter Stuge <<a href="mailto:
peter@stuge.se" class="">
peter@stuge.se</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><div class="">Mike Gilbert wrote:<br class=""><blockquote type="cite"
class="">The current (proxied) maintainer is somewhat difficult to work with<br class=""></blockquote><br class="">Why is Arfrever being treated so bad here? To me, it looks like<br class="">you're the one who is difficult to work with. :\<br class=""><
br class=""></div></div></blockquote><div><br class=""></div><div>floppym is not obligated to work with somebody if he finds it</div><div>difficult.</div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class=""><div class=""><br class="">Jakov Smolić
wrote:<br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class="">From what I've investigated, other major distributions don't apply<br class="">any similar patches which means that we are likely to stop carrying<br class="">most (or even all) of the current patches.<
br class=""></blockquote><br class="">What kind of silly groupthink is this? I expect Gentoo to champion choice.<br class=""></div></div></blockquote><div><br class=""></div><div>Adding in a huge heap of patches which exceed the tree limits, have</div><
no justification within them, and nobody else needs is a good reason</div><div>to dump them.</div><div><br class=""></div><div>If someone actually wants them, that's another matter.</div><div><br class=""></div><div>Even if they are being kept,
justification for them should be made</div><div>so that others know why we're doing it, why it's worth rebasing them,</div><div>why we're changing the default behaviour of SQLite, ...</div><div><br class=""></div><div>(This is all worth doing anyway, but
Gentoo, if we're going to do</div><div>tropes, also doesn't like to deviate from upstream without</div><div>justification.)</div><div><br class=""></div><div>Please don't bring out this cliched "choice" trope just because</div><div>we're discussing
something. Obviously if they're actually useful</div><div>in an application, we can talk about keeping them.</div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class=""><div class=""><br class=""><br class="">Mike Gilbert wrote:<br class=""><
blockquote type="cite" class="">There is an open QA bug [1] regarding the large set of undocumented<br class="">patches that are being applied in the stable ebuilds.<br class=""></blockquote><br class="">Arfrever is active in the bug you linked, has
provided explanations<br class="">for the patches and prepared to restructure the patches so that they<br class="">can be gated by local USE flags, has made several different concrete<br class="">suggestions for possible implementations and requested
feedback, but<br class="">has received no reply in the bug and instead there's now this<br class="">backstabbing discussion on this list.<br class=""><br class=""></div></div></blockquote><div><br class=""></div><div>You've missed discussions on IRC and
some of the bugs _have_</div><div>gone unanswered (in particular <a href="
https://bugs.gentoo.org/825278" class="">
https://bugs.gentoo.org/825278</a></div><div>which started this all off).</div><div><br class=""></div><div>Also, we were waiting
several months for new SQLite which</div><div>blocked security bumps for e.g. seamonkey.</div><div><br class=""></div><div>He has also received replies on the bug.</div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class=""><div class="">Really?<br
class=""><br class=""></div></div></blockquote><div><br class=""></div><div>You've intervened in something where you don't know all the</div><div>circumstances, including the history of the contributor,</div><div>with an aggressive tone. Really?</div><
<br class=""></div><div>sam</div></div><br class=""></body></html> --Apple-Mail=_0FFE13C0-FF13-44B6-BE79-7A90EBB659F4--
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iQGTBAEBCgB9FiEEYOpPv/uDUzOcqtTy9JIoEO6gSDsFAmHiDlNfFIAAAAAALgAo aXNzdWVyLWZwckBub3RhdGlvbnMub3BlbnBncC5maWZ0aGhvcnNlbWFuLm5ldDYw RUE0RkJGRkI4MzUzMzM5Q0FBRDRGMkY0OTIyODEwRUVBMDQ4M0IACgkQ9JIoEO6g SDvZKAf/U0KISNrg0fX3Yk8ZLwKawMaCR6UuqGnadwvCFclNn6lEqXsT0byGAxbK Khxj94WAMrzyo3GRncuRh9EDnL4WFQSQRIg4KxIYwy2URV4aUPJJpw9axHvXJWrO CpIextwhNM/ZUajZEYyXTn3f2TzJ8kANJ1JGI8oc+cVQ5wE6ZBtncp/Wm4sWy9zs P3dupK5VBFX4N9bGTdtzi0kH/oiS0oZD46GFzg/EzVLe3ljCEyOUSwFM8CZvd5Yy +EYPn6MK3nH+J5Wd5b+rB3O3MQDhJW+kddobE1mkNUfGmG70AkBLFbkoGcVOXXoe kblnePp8T67l7FnKK66+a9FgrvWCVg==
=cCQW
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)