> On 14 Jan 2022, at 23:10, Peter Stuge <[email protected]> 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
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
