On Mon, 2003-02-24 at 21:41, Ben Reser wrote: > On Mon, Feb 24, 2003 at 10:47:37AM -0500, Murray J. Root wrote: > > The problem is not a broken KDE that requires patching. It is the > > unnecessary addition of "requirements" that are not really "required". > > This has been a problem in Mandrake for a long time. That is why I > > said to quit beating the horse - the Mandrake team disagrees with > > using "requires" the same way an English speaker uses it and it is > > quite clear that no amount of messages to the list is going to get > > them to change it. So live with the bloat or force nodeps. > > I don't really agree with you Murray. I disagree with some of the > requires we have. But I have successfully gotten some removed. mutt's > require on urlview comes to mind. > Ben, the problem is the attitude of the KDE packager, not much to do with mutt.
> I have found as Buchan points out that it is far more successful to fix > the problem and submit the patch than simply complain about the issue. > If someone really wants to split KDE then someone should take the time > to repackage it split out. Submit the patch and let the debate ensue. > > Constant bellyaching about something people could do something about > serves no purpose in solving the issue. k. I apologize in advance, the following is only political debate. It was working, then broken by Mandrake. I don't suppose they did it without knowing. I can propose whatever fix I want, they will never even acknowledge the problem. The fix is very simple, they just don't give a screw. When I proposed a patch correcting a BuildReq for kdevelop, it took me 3 or 4 emails (never answered), 3 bug confirmations and two corrections (never answered either) to eventually have it applied after 2 months (I am not even sure this is because of my input since I had to close the bug myself). Something like 'Sorry I forgot', 'Yes we saw the problem' is beyond their ability. All the other packagers try to keep us up to date and acknowledge our input, are we so dumb that everything we say about kde is rubbish? They never answer any question and completely ignore the comments and suggestions. Then they complain because we don't understand what they are trying to do. Is it really whining when someone forces me to install what I estimate to be 30MB of code I will never use. Wouldn't it be worth at least a little debate? What's the point of having cooker if when I try to state my problem, I receive for answer 'It works for me, have a good WE'? Sure I can start ignoring the deps, but I never had to do so in the past and I am not surprised that it starts with KDE. I came to linux because it was modular and organized. What we have here is total contempt for these concepts (just like blah, blah). There's no point in arguing and I don't want to beat any horse, even dead, but I am really disappointed by this unfair attitude; most of all that it does not change. Sorry again, -- Quel Qun <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
