Re: [gentoo-project] Re: Questions for Candidates (was: Questioning/Interviewing council nominees)

[Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Rich Freeman schrieb:
> Forked packages are potentially even worse.  Do you want the version of
> apache that contains backported bugfixes but vanilla config files, or
> the one that has gentooified configs but no init-script?  Maybe somebody
> should make yet another fork that mixes and matches those. Then another
> maintainer makes a fork with a logrotate script, but they only include
> systemd units and not an initd script.

I do agree that forked packages do decrease usability to some degree. But I
think that is not a serious problem as long as their number remains
manageable, and proper documentation exists. Should a situation like the
one you describe arise for a non-negligible amount of packages, then I
might reconsider this position.

Note however that I consider the scenario that you describe somewhat
unlikely, because I expect that any package fork will be done with the
intention of swaying as many users as possible to the new package.
Therefore, it will probably include most if not all functions of the
original package.

> Maintainers shouldn't have to do the work to support any configuration
> they're not comfortable testing/etc, but if somebody else comes along to
> do it for them, the solution is cooperation, not revert wars.

Yes, cooperation is better. But the method how to achieve cooperation is
convincing through arguments, not forcing changes against the wishes of the
maintainer.


Best regards,
Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.20 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with SeaMonkey - http://www.enigmail.net/

iEYEARECAAYFAlHQEcEACgkQ+gvH2voEPRAKsgCeNMMLVG6x1l5r5hz2ZxUsP2kv
jYUAn3tV5oMvHvFpSVP0W3LTatvz64C7
=z3uz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----