This may be a dead horse, but a few points. On 16/07/13 07:20 PM, Gaetan Bisson wrote: > If you wish to go against this decision (such as to support other init > systems) you need to submit a proposal here so we can discuss it first. One could argue that having syslog-ng in [extra] supports other init systems in some small way. This does not come at anyone's expense though. Unfortunately, netcfg would come at the expense of reputation because it is an Arch project. Supporting things deprecated by Arch itself sends a worse message than supporting things that were deprecated by others. > When the upstream maintainers of a project find it too messy and > switch their development efforts to a cleaner fork, I find it quite > naive to "re-release the messy original now, and see about fixing it > later"... Again, I think the key here is that it was an Arch project. If for some reason a TU released community/thunar-thumbnailers "Predecessor to tumbler" most people wouldn't care. A project's own developers are the most likely people to think it is messy.
As for the whole "push first discuss later" thing, people shouldn't be afraid to take this approach. Maybe I misused it but "back in my day" there was an Arch dev who had wise words <https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?pid=355343#p355343> about this sort of thing.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
