On 8/10/05, Philip Dillon-Thiselton <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I sincerly hope the two of you are not going to start argueing here as well!
matthew g wrote:
> No one is talking about having 2 instances of pacman running at once
>
> As Far as I know this is not good idea because with two packages
> isntalling at the same time is a great chance for corruption.
>
> On 8/9/05, *Sepht* < [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
>
> I hardly think that mentioning msg43's mailing list discussion is
> worth
> calling it an "attack."
> Distrowatch is all about popularity, Arch is constantly where it
> is and
> thats good enough for a distro that releases rarier then most.
>
> The reason for the minor debate I think is that people just don't
> think
> or know enough about whats ahead. Does anyone really know what's
> supposed to be in pacman 3.0 and how thats going? if it is? what other
> parts of the distro are being improved on? I just don't find this
> information out there. It's interesting that no one is talking
> about the
> graphical Java based and GTK Based pacman builds. No one is talking
> about having 2 instances of pacman running at once. Not enough people
> know about what people are wanting to innovate for arch. All we have
> are some simple "devland" updates in a newsletter.
>
> Seems to me like there's not enough discussion about what matters
> because people aren't being told about what matters.
>
> Oh any by the way, the main wiki HowTos page needs a complete
> makeover.
>
> cheers,
> sepht
>
> >I really don't know how to write this message without actively
> >contributing to the problem I'm denouncing. I logged into my mail
> >today and read the attack on the newsletter, then logged into the
> >forum and read about Arch failing at distrowatch, and stopping gits
> >from selling your work for profit, then read the newsletter. This
> >after the rather interesting about liking peoples' online
> >personalities and a lot of political posts concerning AUR
> design, and
> >IRC or forum moderation.
> >
> >I'm wondering where all this political discussion has come from.
> There
> >have always been dissenting opinions on the direction Arch should go,
> >often accompanied by constructive discussion that eventually
> improves
> >Arch. But lately, the debates are over what appear to be very minor
> >details, and yet everyone joins in the discussion whole-heartedly, as
> >if deciding this particular issue is going to affect the very future
> >of our distro!
> >
> >There have been many vague references to Arch being a 'growing
> >community' and experiencing 'growing pains'. This explanation makes
> >perfect sense on the surface. But take a look at any forum or
> mailing
> >list thread that has become a hot topic in recent weeks. The majority
> >of the posts tend to be made by relatively long-standing members of
> >the community. Members who have contributed a lot and have gotten
> >along for a long time are now engaging in the silliest arguments. Its
> >not caused by new members wanting to change everything about Arch --
> >such posts have always been and still are quickly shot down.
> >
> >I'm not a sociologist, but after pondering this issue for a
> while, and
> >then watching the ant infestation crawling across my floor, I
> >experienced a flash of insight.
> >
> >We discuss all these minor issues to death because most of the major
> >issues have been addressed.
> >
> >That's right. We're destroying our community with these (often
> >ridiculous) discussions because we don't have anything better to fix
> >or complain about!
> >
> >An example, documentation: In the old days, people complained about
> >lack of documentation. When the wiki was created, the community
> >pitched in and created an amazing number of HOWTOs in a short amount
> >of time. That issue has been addressed, and with the new mature wiki
> >design, its a simple matter of maintenance.
> >
> >Similarly with pacman, the kernels, dibble's kernel PKGBUILD, the
> >initscripts, our favourite live CD: Archie, and so on. None of these
> >things is perfect, of course, but all are maturing.
> >
> >Yet we still look for issues to talk about. We appear to be a
> >garrulous lot who like to discuss. The problem is, we're discussing
> >such unimportant issues, and we're murdering them. We're fighting
> with
> >our friends over pennies.
> >
> >I can't offer any resolution to this problem besides the obvious one
> >where everybody stops posting. How lonely is that? :-D I just wanted
> >to bring it to people's attention, I guess, so we stop blaming our
> >hypothetical 'growing community' for our problems (we're falling at
> >distrowatch, how can we be growing!?). I know this is going to prompt
> >a lot of discussion in itself, and I almost wish it wouldn't. But I
> >just couldn't keep shut. ;-) So perhaps I should promise, after all
> >this verbosity, not to respond to any replies.
> >
> >Dusty
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >arch mailing list
> >[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
> >http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> arch mailing list
> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
> http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>arch mailing list
>[email protected]
>http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
>
>
_______________________________________________
arch mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
_______________________________________________ arch mailing list [email protected] http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
